babut Posted November 21, 2011 Report Share Posted November 21, 2011 Hi I have an approved I 140 from my previous company. My current company is now filing for my GC all over again. My 140 with the old company got approved in May 2010 with a PD of Nov 2009 My understanding is that I can use this PD for filing 485 with my new company. I have a copy of the approved I 140 that was sent to me. But when I check the status of this in USCIS website now it says that the I 140 was approved in April 2011 where as the actual date of approval is May 2010. I am trying to figure out this anamoly. I know that USCIS doesnt reuse receipt numbers so it cannot be someone elses' receipt number. I just want to make sure I can retain my PD from Nov 2009. Experts. please help me out here !! Link to comment
pontevecchio Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 Pd is the date the Labor/Perm was filed. Link to comment
aboppana Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 yes, you can as long as the old 140 is not revoked. Link to comment
babut Posted November 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 Thanks...My only concern was that the approval form that I had said the receipt date was in April 2010 and it got approved in May 2010 but when I check now on the USCIS website it shows the approval date as April 2011. I am hoping as long as I have the copy of 140 that says the 140 was approved and shows the PD I should be okay... The website status might just be an error? Link to comment
nipukumar Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 Can you please update the audience if you are able to retain the old priority date? In cases like yours, often attorney says if 140 is revoked (They consider 140 is revoked when the old employer withdraws it after you have left the company) or withdrawn priority date can not be retained. Thanks for providing info that helps others and the community. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.