the hottest immigration tracker |
| Got questions on U.S. immigration? |
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
Topic: Must be with same employer after GC??? Who said that???
Hi All-
I have heard now and then some really annoying comment. That one has to stay with the same employer who sponsors his/her GC for the sake of naturalization.
Whoever spread this info, will you kindly provide evidences to substantiate your claim?
Here is what USCIS Guide of Naturalization says about eligibility (pages 18-19) (http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/M-476.pdf):
> If you are at least 18 years old and:
> Have been a Permanent Resident for the past 5 years and have no special circumstances.
>
> NOTE: Over 90% of applicants fall into this category.
I searched the document with "employment", "employer/s", "employee/s" keywords; a few places show up without any relevance to an ordinary GC holder!
The USCIS website further says: (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=fe17e6b0eb13d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCRD&vgnextchannel=4f719c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD)
"Some of you came to the United States as immigrants through a relative or through an employer. Some of you came as refugees or were given asylum status. And some of you came through other programs, like the Diversity Visa Lottery. But now that you are Permanent Residents you all share the same status."
Isn't that loud and clear: "now that you are Permanent Residents you all share the same status"?
Has anyone been denied his/her naturalization due to change of employer after GC?
If there is no substantiation, your claim is just a paranoia.
|
you seem very excited with your discovery. This issue has been discussed multiple times and so far I know, no one in trackitt is conspiring to spread such "rumor" lately. To be honest, you are the one who has brought it up here after quite a while. Others have been busy with more time relevant issues.
Take it easy.
|
This is a very relavant issue! Just go on www.murthy.com and search for this topic. You will find plenty of discussions on this issue. Basically the idea of employment based GC is that you are getting GC for a "FUTURE" position to work with the employer who is sponsoring your GC. If you quit your job right after you get GC then it will show a conflict of interest and can cause issues during naturalization. The attorneys and murthy.com recommend to stay with the current employer for at least 1 year after getting your GC and then you are free to move.
|
What I don't understand is that if staying with your sponsoring employer for 6-12 months after GC is so important, then why is AC-21 allowed? Applicants who invoke AC-21 are not required to stay with their sponsoring employers (the original employer who filed their labor), then why are those who don't invoke AC-21 required to stay with their sponsoring employers?
OR is it that if you invoke AC-21, you must stay with your new employer (for whom you invoked AC-21) for 6-12 months after getting GC?
|
quasar: Here is the proof you are looking for from an official source:
US Customs and Border Protection Inspector's field Manual, Chapter 13, paragraph 13.1:
• An LPR who no longer has the qualifying marital or employment relationship upon which his or
her immigration was originally based may be inadmissible based on fraud. The classification
code on the Form I-551 will permit you to determine the basis for original admission in order to
ask appropriate questions. A table of immigrant categories is included in Appendix 13-1 of
this manual.
So, not only may you be ineligible for naturalization, but you may not even be able to return to the US after a trip abroad.
This is the manual the border inspectors use when they decide who to admit and who not at the border. You can find the manual at www.shusterman.com
|
Then why is AC-21 allowed?
|
If you use AC-21, the new employer becomes the sponsoring employer and you are supposed to have to work for the new employer.
|
That explains it. Thank you.
|
4ever. I agree that this is a very relevant and versatile issue. I also said that, there are lots of threads on trackitt that expand much further on this issue.
What I meant when I said "TIME relevant" is that, there is NOTHING NEW to discuss or share on this issue that has been generated lately as a NEW information.
Examples of time relevant issues are the NC memo, current processing rates at service centers, visa bulletin updates, etc.
It is not a crime to start up a thread on ANY issue, but it would be nice if people would search first on past threads before re-inventing the wheel or suspecting that someone is all of a sudden spreading around rumors.
|
More proof that you have to work for the sponsoring employer:
From chapter 74 of the field adjudicator's manual on adjudicating naturalization cases:
"(C) Immigration Status . In addition to the date on which the applicant acquired permanent residence, your file review should determine the basis upon which such status was gained. In reviewing this section of the application and questioning the applicant about his or her immigration status, you may determine that the applicant was not entitled to permanent resident status at the time he or she immigrated or adjusted status. If the applicant unlawfully acquired LPR status via an immigrant visa you can place the applicant in remov al proceedings. If the applicant unlawfully adjusted status in the United States and has been a LPR for less than five years, you can rescind his/her LPR status under section 246 of the Act (see chapter 26 of this field manual). If the applicant unlawfully adjusted status in the United States and has been a permanent resident for more than five years, a five-year statute of limitations prevents you from rescinding the LPR status under section 246. However, you can still deny the naturalization application under section 318 if the applicant did not lawfully acquire permanent resident status. You should also speak to your supervisor about placing the applicant in removal proceedings. [See sections 212 , 237 , 238 , 239 , and 240 of the Act and 8 CFR 239 and 240 .]
The type of questions you ask the applicant to determine whether the applicant acquired LPR status lawfully, depends on how the applicant obtained LPR status. The following are typical examples of how an applicant may have obtained LPR status.
• Through An Employment Based Petition – An applicant obtained permanent residence through employment with a U. S. company. You should review the employment history section of the N-400 application to ensure that the I-140 petitioning employer is listed. If the petitioning employer is not listed, you should prepare questions to address this issue. Such questions might include:
– Did you ever work for the petitioner?
– How long did you work for the petitioner?
– In what capacity did you work for the petitioner?
– Why did you leave the position?
– What were you paid?
– Where did you work for the petitioner (location)?
– Where did you go or work after you left your job with the petitioner or instead of working for the petitioner?
– When did you first learn that there would not be a long-term position for you?
You should also determine whether the applicant met all of the eligibility requirements of the employment classification under which he/she was granted status. For example, did the applicant have the necessary training or experience that the labor certification required for that classification? The labor certification, which seeks to classify the applicant’s occupation as a shortage occupation, must be filed with the U. S. Department of Labor for most employment-based immigrant petitions. [See 8 CFR 204.5 . and Chapter 22 of this manual.]"
|
This is all a load of baloney as far as I know. After reading through a lot of this paranoia I even asked my Lawyer this question about staying with the employer for 180 days or whatever after my GC was approved. His answer was, "Don't worry, you can bolt". He said I can apply for citizenship in 4y9m without any problem.
|
After this entire wait, it is easy to get paranoid.
I guess if someone worked for employee for 3-5 years then no court can tell him he did a fraud. What, fraud lasted 5 years, and then after GC you quit? How did you dare to do that to your honest-exploiting employer?
If you leave 2 months after GC, you can always find an excuse…
The bottom line is that I believe that this tool is something USCIS have to really weed out people who receive GC by fraud and not hard-working individuals as majority of us here are. I did not hear much about people who did not get naturalized or were even deported just because they left their employers relatively early.
It is all paranoia to me, but I would stay a month or so after receiving of GC and then switch, just to be on the cautious side.
I have a friend who was let go and after a year her GC arrived in her mail. She did not work all that time. She did get naturalized easily. So YMMV, but it is not as strict as we all think...
|
Folks,
Here is a slightly different flavor of the issue above:
I will joining my new employer shortly as I susbstituted his LC and had the 140 approved this past week.
I PLAN on being employed with him atleast till me getting my GC.
My question:
1) Is the 6-12 month time frame apply from the time the GC is approved?
2) Can I "bolt" before my GC gets approved BUT after abt 6 months from the day I start with the new employer, by invoking AC-21?
|
Thank you, dreamercc, for your thoughout and detailed thoughts and posts. I do appreciate.
monamar, I had NOT raised this issue before till this post. Please read a recent post (not mine!) about a letter to Monsieurs President and Vice President. You should have done a little research on your side first. (I feel you made a false/unfair accusation about me). Furthermore, I was too busy - not lazy - to follow your advice to have gone thru all other answers before. If you know the answer, please post so that I (and other fellows) learn something (and thus making our lives easier). By virtue of your philosophy - avoid re-inventing the wheel, I went to class to learn about gravity instead of dropping an apple myself, didn't I?
dreamercc, I incur that the manuals you kindly provided are internal guidelines for border and immigration officers. In my view, the border officers are of particularly concern since the GC holder has little room for maneuver at the entry. However, at the entry one only has to show his/her GC (and passport); how would the border officer/s know about his/her employment or marital status? Do these officers really inquire this sort of information? I have my doubt. In reality, permanent residents (PR's) normally carry only greencards and passports. Would it be reasonable for the officer/s to demand a letter of employment or marriage certificate if they are NOT explicitly stated in any public documents so that PR's could bring with them at departure? Do PR's have to report to the USCIS about their job resignation/new employment and/or divorce/remarriage? I don't think so.
My point is that the border guideline is not enforceable. Of course the officers can ask and the PR tell the truth, leading to a dismissal of the PR. But this would create a public OUTRAGE (if, e.g., the PR's spouse/relatives happen to reside inside the US) since the requirement of "faithfulness" in one's marriage and employer has NEVER been made known to the public at large and the GC holder in particular. Am I right about this?
How about the naturalization? The guideline says: "you may determine that the applicant was not entitled to permanent resident status at the time he or she immigrated or adjusted status". Well, that's easier said than done. Most of us were admitted to the US thru F1 visa (student) which we must convince/establish to the consular officer/s about our intention to RETURN. We subsequently applied for H1B which shows our intention to STAY. Did the H1B adjudicator/s ever determine - based on our intention to stay now - that "the applicant was not entitled to" his/her F1 visa before??? The answer is simple: we always are in GOOD FAITH; we did intend to return THEN and do intend to stay NOW.
The manual is to catch blatantly obvious frauds (fake marriages, fake employments). As long as we are in good faith in our employment and/or marriage, we should have no worry.
Thank you all for your participation and thoughts. I do learn valuable things from this thread. As a0217 said, let's move on to other more pertinent issues than this one.
Kind regards.
|
Couldn't have said it better! A lot of us have been working for the same employer for years. I don't think anyone can reasonably question your intentions after having worked there for 4-5 years just because you left after I-485 was approved.
When I get my GC, unless it says on it "You can only work for ACME Inc.", I will do as I damn please. I just happen to sort of like where I work and probably will continue to work where after I get approved.
Rubbish, rubbish and more scaremongering! Those laws were designed way back when it took like 2 years from start to finish, as I've been told by several lawyers. Here's the bottom line if you ask your lawyer: if you have been employed by your sponsoring company for about 4-5 years or more, and have been on the prevailing wage for a couple of years or more before the GC is issued, you can leave within about 30 days of getting your GC. Why? Because the employer already fulfilled their obligation way over a reasonable time frame. It is USCIS that took too long. There is no case of citizenship denied on these grounds. Furthermore, take into account that 485 should be issued within a reasonable time of 180 days, which it is not. Therefore, if anyone got denied at citizenship over leaving too soon, you could counter sue on the basis of the USCIS taking too long to adjudicate. I've been told I can leave my employer 30 days after I get my GC because I have been with them for 7 1/2 yrs. I intend to exercise my rights! Also, how on earth are they going to follow each and everyone of us for the next 5yrs? Please! They can't and they cannot get your IRS returns either. All that will matter is what you are doing at the time of citizenship and that you have not been drawing unemployment benefits during the 5 years. That info. they will have access to.
Now let's get one with more pertinent issues.
|
Who cares.
First let me get the greencard and then worry about citizenship after 5 years.
|
Agreed. One should work at least 6 months for the sponsoring employer after receiving the GC. This is what I have found through my research of different websites and forums. Murthy.com mentioned that they know of a person whose GC was revoked since he/she left the sponsoring employer right after getting the GC. Most of us have waited several years (in some cases 5 years or more) for the GC. It doesn't make any sense to risk it over a 6 month period.
Again my 2 cents. Not a legal advice
|
The fear (and lawyers' various claims) is groundless....
As long as the requirement of sticking with one's employer/spouse is not in statute, little the USCIS can do. Of course the manuals (dreamercc provided) do have a purpose: encourage the officers to look out for frauds (yet at the same time, they can't say aloud like Big Brother "we are watching. Behave!"). This reminds me of a New York subway slogan "If you see something, say something". There's a difference, though: If you sound a false alarm about something which you see on the subway - namely, in good faith - you won't be held accountable. Here, catching a potential GC fraud requires more prudence than just an anonymous call.
Lawyers are logics-based, supposedly. But in this case they are irrational. Logically, if an "employment-based" naturalization case is disapproved because of a change in employer (not because of fraud evidence), the petitioner will have an absolutely legitimate and explosive argument to the USCIS going like this: "Excuse me? You didn't require me to RE-APPLY for my GC upon my new employment. I would have had a new GC by now. You were at fault. Now YOU reject my case?". Would be entertaining to see how the USCIS files a Motion to Dismiss...
Suspecting a fraud (and acting on it) is much much much different a story than publicly requiring that an employee stay with the sponsoring employer (as the letter to Monsieurs Prez and Vice Prez implies). NOWHERE in statute can the latter be found. Am I right or not?
Lawyers just want to make money. "6 months" represents the best of THEIR interests.
This is my last post about the issue.
|
I don't see any logic behind "Lawyer's interest in having the person to stay with the GC employer for 6 months". What are they going to Gain out of it??
No one knows what should be the exact time frame for leaving GC sponsored employer. Most lawyers though say that 6 months is sufficient period to show permanent employment intention. BTW permanent in immigration dictionary does not mean for ever.
One should do whatever they feel is the right thing to do after doing their research and consulting with immigration specialists (lawyers). We are just here exchanging our ideas based on our knowledge and research of the subject.
|
Whats the big deal sticking around with an employer for 6 months after getting GC especially if you have worked with them for
like 7- 8 years anyways. Unless they are really underpaying you so much. Which is something you have blame yourself for
because either you didn't market yourself well enough or you aren't that good a worker and so are ready to put up with a shady company.
|
right on money my friend!!
|
You're right. I was exaggerating somewhat about lawyer's interest in "6 months". But think about it: upon getting you a GC, they win your trust and hope to represent you again for future naturalization, don't they? They are making a hedge: making sure they have a good case of yours.
My lawyer is just horrid. The first time she represented me, she handled my case in some funny way; smelling something fishy, I came back to her with different info collected from Rajiv Khanna's forum (I showed her the website!); she INSISTED that she was right; I trusted her. Boy, was she wrong!
|
We can say "rubbish", or "my lawyer says this", or "stay 6 month and be safe", and we still don't know. Why? Because NOBODY knows for sure. Even Rajiv Khanna admits that he does not really know (make sure to read his posts linked below). Let's be humble, collect information, talk to lawyers and make our _own_ calls as to the risks we take. It's fine to express different opinions, but let's not try to force these opinions upon each other. BTW - big THANKS to everyone, who provided references to manuals and lawyer's opinions, I truly appreciate well-founded data.
Here is the info that I would like to share, plus some advise from lawyers with 20+ years of experience. Note that in my particular case I work for the same employer for 4.5 years and it's nearly 2 years since I-485 filing.
1. Some mention "Seihoon v. Levy" with its 30-60-90 doctrine of intent (no change of employers within 90 days after GC approval). Basically, you will feel very bad if leaving employer within 30 days of GC approval - http://www.usvisahelp.com/index.php?view=article&catid=1%3Aarticles&id=13%3Aissues-of-intent&option=com_content&Itemid=5
2. One lawyer says that "Seihoon v. Levy" does not apply since it's a 1976 case, and does not take AC21 and processing delays into account. The lawyer also mentioned that 2 years of work for company A after filing AOS prove that I did have intent to work for them permanently.
3. Rajiv Khanna in one of the postings mentioned that "Technically speaking, the moment you decide that you will leave after a certain period of time, "permanent" intent is gone. ...... I doubt very much CIS would go so far as to deny citizenship where an employee left too soon. Under the current scheme of things (AC21, processing delays) such a case would be a bad case for CIS to fight. So as one community member said, don't worry." http://boards.immigration.com/showthread.php?t=154533
4. Another lawyer says "It would be difficult for USCIS to deny naturalization application if green card is approved several days before your move, as your I-485 application has been pending well beyond the 180 days required for AC21 portability. In some cases like this, we have filed the AC21 notice even after the I-485 approval, so that the job change notice is on record."
Now, if your AOS was filed less than a year ago, you will need to collect your own info and keep #1 in mind : )
BTW, this is NOT a legal advise ! Make your own calls and take your own risks.
|
Well, each one of us had better beware of "roadside bombs" from GC till naturalization 5 yrs down the road.
Had my parents yrs ago known about the horrendous namecheck procedure!
I personally know a guy with same last name as mine. However by some fortunate incident, in all paper works his last and middle names stick together to form a name completely new and unheard of. The dude sailed thru NC without a hitch!
|
You can do whatever you want. In the end it's about trying to do what makes most sense for you and taking what risks you are willing to take.
If you think you can get your citizenship if you leave your employer in 30 days after getting your greencard, who knows! Maybe you can. Maybe though, you can't. For most people that are in non-exploitive normal, legitimate sponsorships, we don't mind continuing to work for their sponsoring employer for a while. It removed any potential anxiety down the road and that's after all the intent of the Greencard.
It's all about whatever personal risks you are willing to take. It's just important to recognize that if you are someone that isn't in a desperate or exploitive work situation, you should consider staying for a while to a) prove that you are true to your intent when you applied for your greencard and b) to avoid any unnecessary hickups down the line.
The more deperate you are to leave your employer, the more likely your sponsorship was dubious to start with. We all want change after years, but for those of us with legitimate employers (not desi consulting companies that are just middle men taking your wages for 'sponsorship'), ie, those that employ many people, including citizens, etc, we are happy to serve out some time as continued permanent employees.
The reason most lawyers say 6-12 months, is because they feel this greatly reduces any possible risks. If you wish to incur those risks, that is fine. Just don't speak as if there is no chance of a problem leaving early because as this thread is shown, there is some risk.
Those that do chose to leave, may be fine. But I'm guessing that some of them may wish they hung in a bit longer as they post threads like "I left 2 weeks after GC and got RFE! HELP!!!" when they are going for citizenship.
The rest of us, will be submitting our applications, sleeping at night and waiting out turn to take the oath.
|
I appreciate your thoughts, swoca.
Now I get a crystal clear picture. I would like to close the thread.
Thank you all for kind posts. Best of luck with your quest of the green!
|
Everyone has discussed the scenario of where one after getting the GC leaves the sponsoring employer and goes to another employer either having fulfilled AC21 requirements or after some period of time having worked for the sponsoring employer.
I think the point lost in discussion as being a serious issue is where a GC holder interacting with CBP/USCIS or one applying for naturalization did the following:
a) Company A sponsored an individual for the GC while the individual was with company B. At the time of approval the individual leaves Company B joins Company A but resigns on their own volition after 30 days or less than 90 days. The individual never again works for Company A and their total cummulative time for the sponsor is 30 days.
b) Company A sponsored an individual, the individual met AC21 requirements by working for them for say 1 year while the application was pending. At approval the individual suddenly resigns, does not work for another employer and instead remains unemployed while engaged in other activity eg 100% school paid for by themselves or paid through public benefits (Financial Aid, Scholarships etc), travel, paid sportsmanship etc for an extended period of time without working for another employer up or close to the time of their interaction with USCIS.
Please give your views...I think these types of cases are where it is absolutely clear the individuals actions show a clear lack of a intent to engage in "permanent employment" and where revocation or denial of entry is likely to be the outcome. Has anyone considered a scenario where the employer makes a report to USCIS about the employer who "used" them to get a GC for "permanent employment" quit 2 months after receiving it?
|
Technically you can do what ever you want once you get your GC.
There is no specific law about how long you must stay in the position for which you were sponsored.
Since USCIS cannot look into your brain to see the intent, guidance(don't confuse this for law or rule) is that if an employee stays in the sponsored position for at least 6 months after the green card is approved then he/she should be able to make a good faith argument that it was the initial intent that the sponsored position be a permanent one, but that a new opportunity simply became available.
If you leave immediately after getting your GC then it's hard to convince an officer if questioned about the intent because it looks like you just waited for GC to leave the employer.
|
I concur, I agree that USCIS cannot look to see what is in your mind but perhaps this is where the "rapid sequence of events" immediately following the approval of GC is what could be a determining factor or perhaps it may be guided by precedent cases (eg Mahmood v. Morris; Lun Kwai Tsui v. Attorney General of the United States; Seihoon v. Levy) that USCIS/ the courts have chosen to recognize in establishing intent.
You are right about guidance, it is not the law, some guidance outlines are good for USCIS and others are good for the applicant, USCIS is not bound to follow guidance and can choose to ignore it with no consequence.
I think at the end of the day as you say, common sense and good faith is what prevails, if it looks like one chose to abuse the system by acting in bad faith then it is likely one will be made with bad fate. At the same time a bad faith abuser may get away with it, its just a risk that one takes in doing so.
|
to dreamercc: what if the employeer fires/lays off employee some time (say, a month) after green card is issued&received? will employee be ineligible for naturalization?
|
If you are laid off/fired, then it's a different story.
Wrong. Intention applies to BOTH of you. Employer must also have had intention to employ you forever at the moment of adjudication. USCIS will ask the same question to your employer now, and if they will figure that your employer was already planning to lay you off - you will get in trouble. Did you think it would that easy to fool USCIS? |
I agree, enduring, theoretically. IF your company went bankrupt right after your getting GC or something crazy happened - and they laid you off. But what are the chances of such coincidence? Do you think USCIS would believe that? USCIS might want to go into very little detail in such cases. Because it's just not happening like that. Companies don't spend money for H1/I-140 of their employees and then suddenly lay them off, or prove that they are in good standing during I-140 phase and then suddenly going bankrupt. Any such activity would trigger further investigation if, even worse, the company is about 10 people.
|
If you get your green card, work for a few days or weeks, then your company abruptly goes bankrupt. It's not your problem and your company is not at fault either.
This could be a case, but not when you got fired. Just imagine, company started GC process in good faith, then found out an employee become a real lazy jerk, or, for example, unable to to work as a team member, does it looks like fooling USCIC in the past? Sure no. |
..Will USCIS suspect Citibank is playing foul? I highly doubt it.
I agree. That's another advantage of working for a large company. |
I don't understand why there's even a discussion. the message that opens this thread says it all, loud and clear.
Of course people can continue to be paranoid. Have fun.
|
This is not complex.
Having the 'same status' as others does not mean that your application isn't a fraud.
If you get your GC through marriage your status is NOT the same if they find that the marriage is sham. Or rather, you status is NO LONGER the same once they discover that.
Sometimes it's fraud. Sometimes it's not. Sometimes it's borderline.
Risk it or don't risk it.
Your situation, your own circumstances, your life, your choice.
|
what's the meaning of a green card application for the company? In most cases, it has none. They can hire the employee on a visa. The green card is for the employee, not the company. As long as the company is legit, there's no way for it to be "fraud".
|
..As long as the company is legit, there's no way for it to be "fraud".
Sur... tell that to IO or immigration judge... let's see how long you will last... don't you ever check cases of people who after 15-20 years of life in the US suddenly get deported? People in US POEs with green cards handcuffed and deported to their countries? No, they aren't criminals, nor illegals, they get in trouble because of these little things. If you wanna be Robin Hood - go ahead, be. Everybody makes his/her choice.
I know PERSONALLY people who got in trouble for not following little simple rules many years AFTER getting GC. Simple thing as what to tell at POE "why were you absent for such long time - 4 months?". Wrong answer - Bam!! - placed on deportation (happened with my cousin). |
..As long as the company is legit, there's no way for it to be "fraud".
Sur... tell that to IO or immigration judge... let's see how long you will last... don't you ever check cases of people who after 15-20 years of life in the US suddenly get deported? People in US POEs with green cards handcuffed and deported to their countries? No, they aren't criminals, nor illegals, they get in trouble because of these little things. If you wanna be Robin Hood - go ahead, be. Everybody makes his/her choice.
I know PERSONALLY people who got in trouble for not following little simple rules many years AFTER getting GC. Simple thing as what to tell at POE "why were you absent for such long time - 4 months?". Wrong answer - Bam!! - placed on deportation (happened with my cousin).
What's a wrong answer for that question?
I never heard of anybody being deported with a green card. |
Scary story before bed... What was next? Did they send cousin to Guantanamo or executed him in a bathroom?
|
What's a wrong answer for that question?
I own business in Russia.
He traveled a lot and most of the time spent in Russia/Spain. The IO alleged that my cousin has no intention to live in the US if he owns succesful business in Russia, and visits US only to maintain his GC. That's it. |
The case was later dismissed by immigration judge. His wife was already about to get US citizenship and son (citizen) was 20. The lawyer suggested to delay the case until the wife will get citizenship, so there will be no risk involved at all and so judge will dismiss easier. That's what they did. The judge dismissed the case right away and was pretty pissed at prosecutors. He called them close, ordered our lawyer to move away (we don't know what he told them), but it was funny to look at their faces.
But still - my cousin spent some money on lawyers, was nervous, missed contracts - because he couldn't travel, etc. etc.
|
well, I don't plan on owning a business out of the US.
Any other wrong answers?
|
Any other wrong answers?
Per my lawyer (or per one of dozen of my lawyers) the only right answer is no answer. You have right to keep silence, so do it. If you feel that IO is trying to get you into something, just hand him the business card of your lawyer and say "Speak to my lawyer - I will not speak without legal representative". |
Per my lawyer (or per one of dozen of my lawyers) the only right answer is no answer. You have right to keep silence, so do it. If you feel that IO is trying to get you into something, just hand him the business card of your lawyer and say "Speak to my lawyer - I will not speak without legal representative".
...and you can scream "don't tase me bro" after making that statement without legal consequences. |
...and you can scream "don't tase me bro" after making that statement without legal consequences.
Even better - later you'll make a documentary named "Abuse and inhuman tortures of legal aliens by IOs at POEs"... make some money out of it... - America is a land of opportunities... after all... or... wasn't it last time? |
anyway this is irrelevant to this thread. Do you also have a close friend who was denied citizenship due to not staying with employer after becoming a permanent resident?
|
...Do you also have a close friend who was denied citizenship due to not staying with employer after becoming a permanent resident?
I don't. My lawyer said he does many - not just denied citizenships, but green cards revoked. All my close friends/relatives worked for the sponsoring employers for at least 6 months. Nobody wants to take that stupid risk. |
Piolopascual: If the employer fires/lays off the employee through no fault of the employee (assuming the employee didnt start being lazy or coming late to work after getting GC) then there should be no problem for naturalization. It may be a good idea to keep as many docs as possible to prove all the circumstances surrounding the lay off.
|
...Do you also have a close friend who was denied citizenship due to not staying with employer after becoming a permanent resident?
I don't. My lawyer said he does many - not just denied citizenships, but green cards revoked. All my close friends/relatives worked for the sponsoring employers for at least 6 months. Nobody wants to take that stupid risk.
My friend is a legal assistant in a big immigration lawfirm, and she never heard of any such case. |
|
Users currently subscribed this discussion: robin, igorch75, tishoo, russianninja, darren007, dreamercc, pjlmiranda, bestia, bengaluru, Hearthrob, July31stRN, franticsky, micJ, gemini462, anne1, geezcard, quasar, skyblue4848, metr5550, piolopascual, my2cents, Trackbuzz, godsgift1973, whitecollarsla, jkays, lanwarrior, kajool, gordita, dickenson, bonzer
|
