postbox134

Also had another thought - even if you had lots of L1 time left. What if you got laid off? These days that seems like it could well happen. After 6 months of pending I-485 you could find new work under AC21, but then you'd be stuck in the US without AP. Therefore, having AP is always a good idea just in case.

tht

there are also more positive reasons, like being offered a promotion/relocation, study, 2nd job/side hustle etc. your current visa may not cover/allow… the advise given to me at the time was to get it but not use it unless it was actually needed for a reason…

Connor1518

This is actually where I find myself, long story, but my L1 expired (even with recapture) with the gc appplication still pending, so I can't work (no EAD) or travel (no AP) even if I can still be here in the US pending the aos Not a great outlook atm and future is very uncertain...

S Folinsky

I’m reminded of the parable of the old experienced marine engineer brought in when the engine on a large ship ceased to function. The engineer briefly examined the ship’s power train. He then pulled out a small hammer out of his tool box and lightly tapped a a particular place in the power train and the engine then worked perfectly. The ship’s owner objected to the invoice for $10,000 demanding an itemization. So, new invoice for time expended, $20, knowledge of where to tap the hammer, $9,980. Underlying moral - what was the value of getting the ship up and running.

The current regulations and ancillary material is readily available on line. It took me about five minutes to find the information which you admit you could not find. (Regulatory history can be somewhat difficult to find, but current regulations are readily available. BTW, the change was by what I consider a stealth amendment in violation of the general published notice requirements of the law. Therefore all too easy for attorneys to miss a change until it bites on the rear end. But I digress).

postbox134

Would happen to have a link to any of this material so one could also review it? Considering our law firms have also decided that this is the case I'd be interested to research it and feed that back to them.

S Folinsky

The appropriate links have already been posted in this thread, many by you.

postbox134

I'm still confused, here are the threads posted so far by myself and others:

• https://www.proskauer.com/alert/gree...-depart-the-us
• https://www.murthy.com/2017/08/10/us...erseas-travel/
• https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/...4-external.pdf

The first two are just blogs from law firms talking about the original change back in 2017.

The last one is from USCIS and the only part in it I can find does say that I-131 will be denied when adjudicated if the alien has been found to have left the US before adjudication:

So that would seem to be the official answer, but with no reference to the special case of Dual Intent Visas such as L1 or H1. To Connor's point, is there anywhere you can reference officially from USCIS about how they handle this situation? My assumption is that the law firms who deal with this all the time can see that eventually these I-131 applications are now denied when looked at (many months later due to processing backlogs). Therefore, from the 'ants eye view' that Connor and myself have as applicants with only one case, is that we should apply again on re-entry to the US to ensure that a valid and approvable I-131 is ready when USCIS chooses to look at it. This was explained in the cover letter I sent to USCIS with my new I-131.

We'll have to see what happens if/when it gets looked at by an officer.

Noorah101

Even if you were to get a live person at USCIS, you cannot count on them to give you accurate information. Call 3 different times and get 3 different answers. They are just phone reps, they don't know answers to specific questions.

Rene

S Folinsky

You seem to be asking whether or not the links you list are accurate or not.

Do recall that you admit to making an error in that your second application is incomplete. I remain curious to see what DHS does with that one.

postbox134

I still don't see where that error is?

I don't doubt that the above documents are accurate, indeed I proceeded in the assumption that they are. However, I am still in search of some official documentation that confirms it.

tht

he is probably referring to something like the above where you say you left a field blank…I believe if you don’t have an actual day the lawyers put “unknown” or pick a future date… looking back it mine the lawyer put “ASAP” and it was eventually approved/issued…

postbox134

Oh I wasn't clear on my original post responding to Connor.

I put in a new travel date (6 months out in June) that I made up.

The blank part was referring to the "who prepared my application" part of the form. As it was prepared by me I left that park blank. Apologies for the confusion if that's the case

S Folinsky

Actually, you were quite clear: "Yeah I just changed the "expected travel date" and left that blank." "That" referred back to expected travel date.

What you have not been clear about is your desire for official information despite your reference to self-same info.

postbox134

Reading it back I can see why you'd think that, but in my head I wrote that as two sentences. This could have been avoided if you'd be clearer by what you meant with an error.

Would you not want an official source of information?

​​

S Folinsky

What do you mean by “official source?” I am very well aware that there is often different legal sources. You are very aware of the I-131 instructions inasmuch as you have post the link and quoted therefrom. Pursuant the regulation at 8 CFR 103.2(a), the instructions are to be considered as part of the regulations. (I have long felt that provision to be an end around the normal notice and comment requirement for promulgation of regulations when used for a substantive change.)