How does one prove that five years’ experience gained while working for one employer, with one job title is progressively responsible in nature?
That issue was key in a recent EB-2, I-140 petition. USCIS issued a Request For Evidence (RFE) alleging that although the employee had the requisite experience, he had failed to establish that his experience had grown progressively responsible after receipt of his Bachelor’s degree.
We have received a series of reversals and remands from the USCIS appeals office (“AAO”) where we had argued that the USCIS had erroneously and illegally revoked approved I-140 petitions. The grounds of appeal in the cases involved:
Failure to prove qualifications of employee because the documentation of experience was insufficient;
Successorship-in-interest of companies, where one company was acquired by another;
Legality of “roving jobs,” consulting positions that require periodic relocation.
We represented an IT consulting company and a Senior Software Engineer employed by them from the point forward where they received an RFE. USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) questioning accreditation of the Indian universities where the applicant received his degrees. We researched the universities in question and documented that both are highly regarded and world renowned institutions. Additionally, we received an expert opinion that noted that both universities were accredited at the time the applicant received his degrees.
We were called upon to correct a situation. USCIS sent an RFE stating that the degree and field of study did not match with the labor certification requirements. The I-140 beneficiary had a degree in agricultural science. The employer's requirement in the labor certification was a BS degree in Computer Science, Engineering, and Mathematics.
We were hired to respond to an RFE. Client filed an EB2 I-140, where the PERM Petition required a Bachelor's and 5 years of experience. The client received an RFE in which USCIS argued the Beneficiary's degree, a Bachelor's in Commerce from India, equates to a 3-year degree and cannot be considered for an EB2 case. The Beneficiary possessed a four year Bachelor's Degree, however, this was not clearly established on his Degree. The client obtained his BS in Commerce before India switched to a standard 3-year program for his particular degree.
A beneficiary had two three-year bachelor degrees from India and consequently his I-140 petition was denied on the grounds that the beneficiary did not have a four-year bachelor's degree. We were retained after the denial. Our firm was successful in appealing and winning in less than one month. Of course, this case had unique facts. We cannot assume that all three-year degree cases will go trough this smoothly.
We discussed: Working concurrently with H-1 cap exempt and quota employers, immigration issues if we have a special needs (cerebral palsy) child, applied B-2 to main status while F-1 is expiring, Section 245(k) and illegal work, DETAILED DISCUSSION OF I-140 REVOCATION IMPLICATIONS INCLUDING AC21, impact on H-1 of reentry on advance parole, Section 13 green card for diplomats, who can co-sponsor affidavit of support I-864, proving cross chargeability, transfer of priority dates for a future job approval
An I-140 petition, or Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, is filed to petition an alien worker to become a permanent resident in the United States. The employer must file an I-140 Petition on your behalf within 180 days from the date your Labor Certification is approved by the U. S. Department of Labor. An I-140 Petition may be filed without a Labor Certification where the beneficiary qualifies under EB-1 classification.

I have finished my first review of H-4 EAD Regulations (effective 26 May 2015). Here are the takeaway points:
This entry is now old law. The new law is at http://www.immigration.com/blogs/i-140-ead-regulations-effective-17-jan…
5 November 2015: After some flip flops, USCIS has gone back to allowing carry forward of priority dates even if I-140 is revoked by employer - as described in this discussion. So, we are good for now.
In a recent meeting, Nebraska Service Center has clarified why, some times, in cases of pending I-485 applications, USCIS approves AOS interchanging the applications of the derivative and principal applicant:
Based on many posts by users of these boards, I’ve decided to write-up a fairly comprehensive posting regarding ability to pay issues and how to overcome RFE’s, Denials and appeals.
Background:
Law governing ability to pay – 8 CFR 204.5(g)(2)
USCIS recently began transferring some Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, cases filed by lawful permanent residents for their eligible family members from the Vermont Service Center to the California Service Center.
If your case was transferred, USCIS will send you a notice listing the transfer date and where your case will be processed. Your original receipt number will not change and this will not delay the processing of your cases except for the additional time needed to transfer the file.