3 employers changed so far

[par310]

I worked at company A.  As per my request, Company A hired Murthy law firm for my case for LCA, I-140 approval . It went very smoothly .Since PD was not current, I kept waited for  I-485 filing.  My priority date was Oct-2008.

 

Then I had to switch job to company B. Started total process again by attorney from different firm and got I-140 approval. The job at company B was similar to job at company A and I could retain PD of Oct 2008. After a while business unit I was working for at company B went out of business before I-485 can be filed.

 

Moved to company C with  very few similarity in job description. Permanent residency process at company C is not started even after 2 years of work. Now company C is ready to start PR process, got offer from company D which has job description similar to job at company A.

 

My questions:

 

0)  What Should I need to ensure, before switching to company D that I will be able to retain PD of Oct 2008 ?

 

1) What can I do to ensure that PD at company C will be retained even though job description is yet to be prepared ?

 

Your expert comments are greatly appreciated.

 

[pontevecchio]

To retain PD, the job need not be in the same field.

[par310]

To retain PD, the job need not be in the same field.

Thanks for the reply pontevecchio.  So what is discussed below  is no longer applicable ? 

 

http://www.*******************.com/******************

[par310]

To retain PD, the job need not be in the same field.

 

 

 

Here is the current rule for retention of priority date:

(http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=da6bdcd5a3e1f8291ba948826f3cb1b2&node=pt8.1.204&rgn=div5#se8.1.204_15)

 

following is the rule for   8 CFR 204.5(e) which is posted at above mentioned location.

 

(e) Retention of section 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) priority date. A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b) (1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.

 

It doesn't seem to talk about keeping  job in  same field. Do experts agree ? 

[pontevecchio]

The job does not have to be in the same field. What is your question?

[par310]

The job does not have to be in the same field. What is your question?

So question is :

what is the source that dictates that job has to be in same or similar field to retain PD ?

 

I believe issue of new job being in same/similar field   while retaining PD comes into play only when I485 is filed for more than 180 days and then job is changed. correct ?

 

In my case I485 was never filed and i kept changing jobs. so even if i continue at company C which has different job description, i should be able to retain PD. correct  ?

[pontevecchio]

Same or similar field is for people post 180 days AOS. For PD retention the job can be in any field. Also read the articles in the Murthy website about some recent difficulties with PD retention.

[pontevecchio]

I have never figured out why the adage pennywise and pound foolish applies so often?. Why not retain the firm of Murthy again?

[par310]

 As I mentioned earlier, I had good experience with Murthy firm . I have made requests to retain the firm at all the companies I worked later on. However bigger organizations with deep pockets do things that they think is right and not an individual who is expecting immigration benefits.

[par310]

Thanks for the confirmation

[par310]

Same or similar field is for people post 180 days AOS. For PD retention the job can be in any field. Also read the articles in the Murthy website about some recent difficulties with PD retention.

I read articles on Murth.com about difficulties faced in retaining PD. My understanding is  that PD retention issue becomes hazy only when I-140 is revoked by previous employers. When I-140 is NOT revoked by previous employers, it is certain the PD can be retained. Is this match with your understanding or there is more to it ?

[pontevecchio]

Revocation of the previous I-140 does not seem to matter. In most cases the PD can be retained. The Murthy articles shed some light. There were special circumstances in the cases where PD retention was not granted. In the interests of abundant caution set up an appointment by phone with say the firm of Murthy?