Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
wallpaper Afghanistan, and Bin Laden
simple1
10-06 03:57 PM
smuggymba, every one knows you are an anti immigrant. dont waste time here with fake posts.
Why should I make the fact gaps public and train anti immigrants like you ?
simple1 - whenever I see ur reply, it's regarding a toll alert. Same with ronhira guy. All you 2 two do is issue toll alert whenever someone asks a question.
H1-B audits are a reality and he is asking about a visit that he got because clearly no one expects it. What's the problem? What fact gaps did ur james bond brain find?
Why should I make the fact gaps public and train anti immigrants like you ?
simple1 - whenever I see ur reply, it's regarding a toll alert. Same with ronhira guy. All you 2 two do is issue toll alert whenever someone asks a question.
H1-B audits are a reality and he is asking about a visit that he got because clearly no one expects it. What's the problem? What fact gaps did ur james bond brain find?
gcsomeday
07-17 05:24 PM
newxyz100, since 485 was already filed, he/she can come back on h1/h4. I believe its just like using your h1/h4 instead of your EAD and AP in future. Experts please correct me if I am wrong.
2011 CIA, Osama in Laden,
MetteBB
06-06 03:04 PM
I know ;)
more...
10dulkar
12-25 10:00 PM
I just receive the best Christmas gift I could ever ask for?? My name check and background check is clear after 2 years.....Now I'm receive my GC so I can start traveling......All my interview was approve so now they are (order card)....Enjoy ur Holiday.......
were delaying his GC. He/She/It/Them/They need to take English Test............. and many of them..................
were delaying his GC. He/She/It/Them/They need to take English Test............. and many of them..................
webm
02-26 01:04 PM
what if my I-485 is July 20, 2007 (it is processing), how long will it take before they can send my GC to me?
First make sure your (EB) PD is Current and then think about July20,2007 thing,....
First make sure your (EB) PD is Current and then think about July20,2007 thing,....
more...
chanduv23
09-04 04:21 PM
This is yet another inefficiency on their part. When it comes to AC21 your file does not even get updated even though you may have attached I-485 receipt along with AC21 filing. But when the employer revokes I-140 they don't forget to send you NOID or even I-485 denial.
yes it is like electricity department in India - If you miss payments for a particular period - the next moment they stand in front of ur house and block power suppply whereas they are seen nowhere in vicinity when you complain that you have a power cut and need someone to fix it.
yes it is like electricity department in India - If you miss payments for a particular period - the next moment they stand in front of ur house and block power suppply whereas they are seen nowhere in vicinity when you complain that you have a power cut and need someone to fix it.
2010 CIA, Osama in Laden,
oomshiva
07-12 09:46 AM
this is realy getting more confusing and I think
Dal mein kuch kala hai ( something is verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry fishy going on behind how to solve this )
Dal mein kuch kala hai ( something is verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry fishy going on behind how to solve this )
more...
DDash
04-05 08:34 AM
Bump
hair trail to in Laden: CIA
txh1b
04-15 09:33 AM
You have no choice but leave US immediately, go for CP, declare your overstay in the DS156 form, come clean to the VO and hope they forgive it.
Good Luck!
Good Luck!
more...
InTheMoment
12-10 02:33 PM
I read somewhere that CBP officers are instructed to make a photocopy themselves if 2 originals are not given.
The photocopying is best left to them as the one you make has potential of having been tampered.
Some one few days ago posted that the she was was adviced by the lawyer to hand over Photocopies of AP and keep the original for herself.
So do you have to give them the original or have them take a photocopy of it and give you back the original ?
The photocopying is best left to them as the one you make has potential of having been tampered.
Some one few days ago posted that the she was was adviced by the lawyer to hand over Photocopies of AP and keep the original for herself.
So do you have to give them the original or have them take a photocopy of it and give you back the original ?
hot helped find in Laden: CIA
sathishkrish
07-17 04:33 PM
i agree with you......dont demand..where have u been all these days coming today and asking IV for updated as they owe you...ofcourse bearing the fruits is not the only thing one can do they can contribute as well...will those new poeple who jpined in july will be willing to contribute to IV for fighting for our cuase GIBVE ME A BREAK
I think it is high time we need to set rules and roles for senior member alike - they are supposed to bring people to the group not the otherway around - We are setting a wrong precedence - A guy who has contributed more than you, can ask you to lay off ilikekilo, and that is not far away.
Anyways, Some of the members have become super stars by being here and wanting to do more so let seniors show the real attitude to freshmen.
Thanks for your understanding
I think it is high time we need to set rules and roles for senior member alike - they are supposed to bring people to the group not the otherway around - We are setting a wrong precedence - A guy who has contributed more than you, can ask you to lay off ilikekilo, and that is not far away.
Anyways, Some of the members have become super stars by being here and wanting to do more so let seniors show the real attitude to freshmen.
Thanks for your understanding
more...
house CIA watched in Laden from
PHANI_TAVVALA
12-02 02:26 PM
FinalGC, Thanks for your reply. I am partially paying for this process. I heard that if the labor is approved and h1b is about to expire, I can apply I-140 under premium processing due to a recent rule change. Is that true? If so, will I be able apply concurrent I-140 and h1B extension?
tattoo de cadáver de Bin Laden a
ashshef
08-31 12:44 AM
Unfortunately this won't help....of course assuming you find a way to do it :)
They look at the country of birth to determine the quota....not country of citizenship.
They look at the country of birth to determine the quota....not country of citizenship.
more...
pictures Capture Osama Bin Laden?
conchshell
09-17 11:06 AM
Keep calling guys ...
dresses Osama Bin Laden and the CIA
solaris27
02-24 12:54 PM
it was for visa stamping
more...
makeup OSAMA BIN LADEN CIA - Page 6
ramus
06-20 01:11 PM
I would suggest to go with EAD and AP for spouse as its better then H1B.
You don't have to stick one employee if spouse has EAD and she doesn't need to find job in perticular field if she has EAD...
But for you, I would say just use H1B as long as you can.
You should put the status on the day you are filing, so if you are filing before she gets on H-1, her status would be H-4.
Question: Why do need to have an AP filed? Is it just to avoid the hassle of stamping?
Just getting an AP approved has nothing to do with the H-1 status. But if you use the AP to enter into US, there is a grey area if the H-1 is still valid or not. If you have an option try to keep her on H-1 and not use the AP, this will make sure that he has a valid work status even if the 485 gets rejected.
You don't have to stick one employee if spouse has EAD and she doesn't need to find job in perticular field if she has EAD...
But for you, I would say just use H1B as long as you can.
You should put the status on the day you are filing, so if you are filing before she gets on H-1, her status would be H-4.
Question: Why do need to have an AP filed? Is it just to avoid the hassle of stamping?
Just getting an AP approved has nothing to do with the H-1 status. But if you use the AP to enter into US, there is a grey area if the H-1 is still valid or not. If you have an option try to keep her on H-1 and not use the AP, this will make sure that he has a valid work status even if the 485 gets rejected.
girlfriend Osama in Laden
txh1b
04-20 10:50 AM
Do not ignore it. Go back to the POE (CBP deferred adjudication office) and they could have a date of 1 month on the top portion they keep and forgotten to put a date on the visitor's copy. They will check the system and put a date on the I-94. You may be risking their visa validity if they over stay. Do it ASAP.
hairstyles Bin Laden is CIA from Good Morning America
newuser
05-14 04:53 PM
Thanks for the update and we all support your efforts.
mbartosik
11-19 12:14 PM
For Nebraska:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
For Texas:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
Summary for I485:
Nebraska has processed most applications that it has had for 7 months (filed on or before April 14 2007).
Texas has processed most applications that it has had for 6 months.
Since 6 months is the target, Texas can be considered to be caught up, and Nebraska will likely have caught up next month.
For I485 that makes the visa bulletin the main issue.
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
For Texas:
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
Summary for I485:
Nebraska has processed most applications that it has had for 7 months (filed on or before April 14 2007).
Texas has processed most applications that it has had for 6 months.
Since 6 months is the target, Texas can be considered to be caught up, and Nebraska will likely have caught up next month.
For I485 that makes the visa bulletin the main issue.
kondur_007
06-08 02:09 PM
What if someone returned the initial I94 but not the latest one because we attched the wrong I94 portion, will we need to send the new I94 after extension back to USCIS as well?
In my opinion, you do not really have to. here are a few points (to the best of my knowledge):
1. Surrendering I 94 establishes the day/date when you left US.
2. If you have more than one I 94 (from the same entry), the "white one" will be attached to your passport and others (that came with extension or change of status) will be attached to your approval notices. THEY ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SAME NUMBER. So, technically you have to surrender them all when you leave the country, but if you surrender any one of them, it still establishes the same thing and you do not need to do anything about the rest.
3. If you forgot to return I 94 altogether, keep a record of your leaving US on specific date (copy of boarding passes, passport stamp of entry in another country etc) and you can use that as an evidence of leaving in time (if asked about it in future). OR you can return your I 94 at a laterdate with these copies attached to USCIS.
I have not heard of anyone getting in trouble because of not returning I 94 (please correct me on this if any of you have heard of it) - as long as they did not overstay.
In my opinion, you do not really have to. here are a few points (to the best of my knowledge):
1. Surrendering I 94 establishes the day/date when you left US.
2. If you have more than one I 94 (from the same entry), the "white one" will be attached to your passport and others (that came with extension or change of status) will be attached to your approval notices. THEY ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SAME NUMBER. So, technically you have to surrender them all when you leave the country, but if you surrender any one of them, it still establishes the same thing and you do not need to do anything about the rest.
3. If you forgot to return I 94 altogether, keep a record of your leaving US on specific date (copy of boarding passes, passport stamp of entry in another country etc) and you can use that as an evidence of leaving in time (if asked about it in future). OR you can return your I 94 at a laterdate with these copies attached to USCIS.
I have not heard of anyone getting in trouble because of not returning I 94 (please correct me on this if any of you have heard of it) - as long as they did not overstay.
No comments:
Post a Comment