PERM Processing Times (as of 11/19/2016)
|
Processing Queue |
Priority Dates |
|
|
Month |
Year |
|
Analyst Review |
August |
2016 |
Audit Review |
April |
2016 |
Reconsideration Requests to the CO |
October |
2016 |
|
Processing Queue |
Priority Dates |
|
|
Month |
Year |
|
Analyst Review |
August |
2016 |
Audit Review |
April |
2016 |
Reconsideration Requests to the CO |
October |
2016 |
Discussion Topics, Thursday, 3 November 2016:
FAQ: Impact on H-1 if converting to H-4 EAD; FAQ: TN work for multiple employers; Legal name change process in the USA.
Other: I-751 - removal proceedings NTA; Premium H-1 extension while H-1 amendment is pending; TN working concurrently on two jobs; TN applying for H-1, quota exemption; Impact on green card, I-140 if changing employers; Date of birth errors; F-1 reinstatement and H-1 pending at the same time; Change of status to TN; CSPA for consular processing; Priority date transfer; EB-2 PERM filing; L-1 stock ownership; Receiving bonus checks from end clients while working through H-1 employer; Refiling PERM if job has changed; Going to school if a green card is pending, etc.
Please click on the link for the updated PERM Processing Times.
| Processing Queue | Priority Dates | |
|---|---|---|
| Month | Year | |
| Analyst Reviews | December 21 | 2012 |
| Audits | June 30 | 2012 |
| Reconsideration Requests to the CO | April 29 | 2013 |
| Gov't Error Reconsiderations | Current | |
We represented an IT consulting company and a Technical Project Lead employed by them. The PERM was selected for supervised recruitment. USDOL denied certification, alleging that the employer rejected a potentially qualified U.S.
We represented a technology consulting services corporation and a Senior Programmer Analyst employed by the firm.
We represented a consulting company and their employee, a Senior Quality Assurance Analyst. USDOL had denied PERM certification after an audit holding that we had failed to submit tear sheets from our Sunday advertisements. We filed the appropriate motion establishing that it was highly likely, if not certain, that the tear sheets were in fact submitted. We provided evidence from our files, affidavits, and proof of our firm’s normal business practice.The case was approved in less than three weeks.
| Processing Queue | Priority Dates | |
|---|---|---|
| Month | Year | |
| Analyst Reviews | January 11 | 2013 |
| Audit Review | July 31 | 2012 |
| Reconsideration Requests to the CO | June 3 | 2013 |
| Gov't Error Reconsiderations | Current | |