axn2000 Posted September 16, 2011 Report Share Posted September 16, 2011 Here is the situation. I am the main applicant with PD of 2005 in EB3. We got our I485 filed in 2007. . My wife does not have a H1 currently.She is working on the EAD. While working in her last job she has a EB 2 priority date of 2006 Jan. The I140 was revoked when she left the job. But i think we can still use the PD. Since GC for EB3 2005 is long time coming we were wondering if we can ask Wife's office to start her GC processing. Is that possible? Link to comment
Belle Posted September 16, 2011 Report Share Posted September 16, 2011 Of course it is possible. Your/her status (or the lack of it) has no impact on getting a new I-140. Once I-140 is filed, however, one may have hard time obtaining visa stamps for certain strictly non-immigrant statuses, like B or F, but since neither of you are going that route, I don't anticipate any issues. Link to comment
Shurap1 Posted September 16, 2011 Report Share Posted September 16, 2011 Originally posted by axn2000: Here is the situation. I am the main applicant with PD of 2005 in EB3. We got our I485 filed in 2007. . My wife does not have a H1 currently.She is working on the EAD. While working in her last job she has a EB 2 priority date of 2006 Jan. The I140 was revoked when she left the job. But i think we can still use the PD. Since GC for EB3 2005 is long time coming we were wondering if we can ask Wife's office to start her GC processing. Is that possible? You cannot port the PD from the revoked I140. Check the text of the pearson's memo. Link to comment
pontevecchio Posted September 19, 2011 Report Share Posted September 19, 2011 "You cannot port the PD from the revoked I140" This applies only if the revoication is for fraud which imp[lies revocation by USCIS. If one has an approved I-140 and one leaves the sponsor can revoke the I-140 though the person gets to retain his/her priority date in future..Pearson or no Pearson. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.