Search

We filed an H-1B extension petition for a small software company that offers customer software and technology solutions to the local clientele. USCIS approved the classification portion of the petition, but denied the portion of the petition requesting an extension of stay. USCIS stated that beneficiary had failed to maintain his nonimmigrant status because his H-1B status had expired prior to the filing of the H-1B extension petition and he was only  in an authorized period of stay because of a pending extension request from the previous employer.

We filed an H-1B petition for a company that provides IT related services, on behalf of the beneficiary, a  software developer. An RFE was subsequently issued, responded to and then denied as failing to prove that petitioner established that sufficient speciality occupation work was available and that the position qualified as a specialty occupation. We filed an appeal with the Administrative Appeals Office, the appeal was sustained and the petition was remanded back for issuance of an approval notice.

We filed an H-1B extension petition for a software consulting and professional services firm on behalf of a software architect requesting status and work authorization for a duration of three years. The extension was, however, approved for a duration much shorter than requested and the approval notice was both dated and received after the shorter validity period had already expired, thereby destroying the legal status of the employee and causing him to accrue unlawful presence.

We successfully responded to an H-1B request for evidence (RFE), questioning the beneficiary’s maintenance of status. The beneficiary’s previous employer (Employer A) had submitted an H-1B extension. While the petition was pending the beneficiary’s nonimmigrant status expired. An RFE was subsequently received by Employer A, and following the filing of a comprehensive RFE response, the petition was denied.

We assisted petitioner, a public accounting firm, in filing an H-1B petition for beneficiary for the position of staff accountant. We received an RFE requesting additional evidence that the position qualified as a specialty occupation by satisfying at least one of the four qualifying criteria for a specialty occupation.  In our lengthy response, we argued that the job duties, as detailed in the petition, and as compared with OOH’s job description for staff accountant not only comports with but goes beyond OOH guidance in its uniqueness and complexity.

We filed an H-1B extension for a specialized medical practice on behalf of a physician who had completed a fellowship in this specialty. We subsequently received a Request for Evidence questioning whether his position satisfied the requirements for a specialty occupation and questioning his current immigration status.

We were approached by an employer in the health and wellness industry to respond to an RFE (Request for Evidence) for an Operations Research Analyst. The RFE indicated that the job duties were vague, and did not allow Service to ascertain the minimum requirements for the position, or determine whether it constituted a specialty occupation. We responded with considerable detail, elaborating on the job duties and providing considerable context about the employer and the strict FDA (Food and Drug Administration) regulations that they are required to operate under.

We assisted an employer in successfully responding to a Request for Evidence (RFE) received subsequent to the filing of an H-1B (specialty occupation worker) extension petition. The RFE requested additional information regarding the employer and the beneficiary’s qualifications. More specifically, the RFE questioned the evidentiary value of an education evaluation that was provided with the petition, requesting additional evidence regarding the qualifications of the college official who authored the evaluation.

We assisted a client company, who develops its own software products and provides related consulting services in filing an H-1B petition to employ a software developer. An RFE was issued requesting additional information regarding the employer, and additional documentation to show that the beneficiary was engaged in a valid curricular practical training (CPT) and was maintaining a full course study in a master’s degree program at a U.S. university at the time of filing.