Our office was retained to process an H-1 Change of Status petition for a Quality Assurance Engineer working on a turnkey project owned by a middle vendor at a client location. We explained to USCIS that the end-client was infact the vendor, who “owned” the project. USCIS denied the petition, holdingthat we had failed to obtain proper documentation from the end-client. We filed an MTR with extensive arguments and evidence that the petitioner was the actual employer of the beneficiary and that the vendor, not the end-client, owned the project.
We were recently retained to address a strange problem. An H-1 petition was approved, but the parties did not receive the approval notice for two years. The notice was apparently lost in the mail. They submitted an application for a duplicate approval notice, which also was issued and also lost in the mail. The employer then filed an application for an extension of status, which was granted without an I-94 attached to it.
Our client, an electronic document management company was issued Intent to Revoke from the Texas Service <span style="font-size: 1
The consulate revoked an H-1B in 1999. The client received notification of the revocation from USCIS in 2004. In the mean time he was still working in USA. We argued against these inconsistent and unconstitutional procedures and submitted an application for extension of his status in 2004.
We have filed no less than 200 cases where USCIS had denied the application or objected to an application based on the fact that the title and position did not require professional level employees. So far, we have won almost all the cases we have filed on motions to reopen or as new filings.