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.
Rajiv and his team bring an unprecedented level of expertise in the matters relating to immigration, and I, personally, and my organization have used their services on a number of occasions with a 100% success rate. The principal reason is their mastery of the overall process in general, but more importantly their keen understanding of the subtleties and nuances of unique circumstances that need special treatment/attention. We are gung-ho on them and have no hesitation in recommending them to anyone.
Employers have certain responsibilities under immigration law during the hiring process. The employer sanctions provisions, found in section 274A of
Our organization has worked with Mr. Khanna for almost 10 years, and retained their services for our immigration needs related to H1 and Green Card filings. Mr. Khanna’s advice has helped us as well as our employees in the most critical immigration related issues. I have worked very closely with Anna Baker, Rena Waddell and Vijay Durgam. I would say that Mr. Khanna has an excellent team in place, extremely approachable, efficient, having an eye for detail, helpful and professional. Inspite of the large volume of cases handled by their office; they manage to review minute details of each case, bring forth concerns if any in a timely manner, along with solutions to handle the concerns. We have secured a 100% success rate in all our filings till date through their office. Reason – efficient and trained staff, and above all Mr. Khanna who has always made himself available for any guidance which may be required. The community conference calls hosted by Mr. Khanna have been highly appreciated by employers as well as employees. This is a free service to the community and is commendable. Mr. Khanna has always provided the right guidance, at the same time keeps his clients updated with latest regulations / amendments. We look forward to work with him for many more years to come. Would highly recommend Mr. Khanna’s office for any immigration related matters and guidance. Good Luck to you and your team Mr. Khanna; keep up the good work! Appreciate it!