Question details
1. Is submitting consolidated returns and audited financial statements for a parent company and its wholly owned subsidiaries sufficient to meet the burden of proof for establishing the company’s ability to pay by a preponderance of the evidence?
2. Where an employee who is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 and is eligible for AC-21 portability ports to a new employer in the same or similar occupation, must the new employer demonstrate the ability to pay the proffered wage from the date of portability?
3. When adjudicating I-485 applications for portability-eligible individuals where the petitioning employer is no longer in business, does USCIS require the subsequent employer to satisfy both the ability-to-pay requirement and the bona fide offer of employment requirement from the date of the employee’s subsequent hire through the approval of adjustment of status?
4. Why are prorated net assets not sufficient evidence to support ability to pay?
5. Why is the Yates Memo not applied if a beneficiary’s W-2 indicates that the actual wage paid to him/her is at least as much as the beneficiary’s proffered wage for the prorated period?
1. USCIS says that it evaluates each consolidated financial statement on a caseby-case basis under the preponderance of evidence standard to determine whether the petitioner has the ability to pay the proffered wage.
2. USCIS says that, in this situation, the new employer is not obligated to demonstrate the ability to pay from the date of portability.
All Readers, I quote from my latest msg. to Mr. Rajiv Khanna's office. Please make yourself more aware on your issues by visiting his web-site (and positively contributing to it) and get advice from his office for your particular needs. All cases are NOT the same. Quote Dear Mr Khanna I barely get time to go to your web-site, though I know it is an ocean of information for all those awaiting their immigration process at some stage or the other. Today I happened to spend an hour there and learnt that your Office had done me good!! I live in an area which lacks Indian neighbors and in my Office too, I am the only Indian working in my whole division! Therefore, there is seldom any interaction with people who are at a similar stage as me in the Immigration process. When my I-140 was filed, your Legal Assistant Nimia Aranibar informed me of the CP option. Though I might have surprised her with my lack of knowledge on this process, she explained the process to me and answered my doubts. And she did as I opted for. No suggestions or implications or other discussion. She was very professional in giving me the information and in answering my questions on the issue. She even understood my concerns with the CP process and offered to clarify my doubts and suggested the recourse to this choice if I needed a recourse at a later date. After reading the chat-site on your web-site, I now realise that the lady was giving me good information at the right time. There are so many people on the web who feel have been un-informed of this process. I, on the contrary, have got the right information from your office and am very happy about this. Thank you and best regards Prateek Rishi Nimia, reading in copy, thank you very much for the time taken to explain me the two processes.