msgd

Here is the Link to the USCIS proposed rule

http://www.uscis.gov/news/uscis-seek...-visa-programs

one interesting point they mentioned

Allow certain high-skilled individuals in the United States in E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, L-1, or O-1 nonimmigrant status to apply for one year of unrestricted employment authorization if they:
Are the beneficiaries of an approved I-140 petition,
Remain unable to adjust status due to visa unavailability, and
Can demonstrate that compelling circumstances exist which justify issuing an employment authorization document.

it says allowing individuals in USA in E-3 to apply for unrestricted Employment authorization if they are the beneficiaries of an approved I-140.
approved I-140 means you have your Green processing started! correct me if i am wrong!
so does this mean that E-3 is dual intent visa already?

mist3rh

Thanks Ian. That is well understood a point if it is nor expressly stated as not being dual intent. However the interpretation of that is a sole discretion of the visa officer and there has been atleast one case where E3 to greencard became an issue largely due to this. i.e. e-3 renewal was denied due to pending i140.

I was hoping to see if anyone knew should the legislation be passed will it then make e-3 dual intent or not.I've heard in the affirmative but it's hearsay only.

docnetau

Do you have any more details on that rejection? The USCIS has specifically stated that an E3 "may not be denied solely on the basis of an approved request for permanent labor certification or a filed or approved immigrant visa preference petition."

http://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/f...dnc_121505.pdf

tronsky

When my spouse and I renew our E3/E3D, do we go to the appointment together and get interview at the same time?

When we got it originally we waited for the E3 to be issued, and then sought the e3d afterwards.

mist3rh

I don't have more details unfortunately and yes I realize that contradictory clause but the onus is on the applicant to justify he intends to be a temporary with his stay in the US under E3 and by lodging an I140 you are clearly displaying the opposite intent. Hence, the adjudicatING officer is likely to use best judgement yo make a call. It may or may not go in the applicant's favor. My company's attorney suggest not risking it. That is why I'm curious on how this proposed legislation pans out and it will then likely make E3 clearly dual intent and people who wish to stay long term will have no legal ambiguity.

sarp

On application how do we prove that our degree is equivalent to US degree? is WES evaluation good enough?

docnetau

Presuming you're applying in Australia and have a standard Australian University degree then you shouldn't really need anything - or at least I've never been asked and I've never heard of anyone else being asked to show any form of equivalency. (In 5 E-3 interviews I've never even been asked to show my degree - only asked what it was and from where)

If you've got a non-Australian/non-US degree, or you're applying at a non-Australian consulate then an equivalency from someone like WES would probably be a good idea, although in most cases I'd still be surprised if you actually needed it.

sarp

I have a 3 year Australian Bachelor's degree (no honours), but I don't have 3 years of experience after university.

Don't they ask for a proof that it is good enough?

mist3rh

They may they may not. Generally they don't. They basically want to be convinced you are qualified for your job either through education or through experience. Wasn't asked for proof of education either. As long as you have a bachelor's degree - 3 years or not

mist3rh

The rule is finally published in the Federal Register

https://www.federalregister.gov/arti...b-1-immigrants

Does anyone know whether this now makes E-3 dual intent or not ?

ian-mstm

As mentioned earlier, E-3 (like most other visas) are already dual intent whether explicitly stated or not. That you know of one case where there was an issue doesn't alter the underlying concept.

Ian

docnetau

Unfortunately the fact it's not explicitly stated is a major issue for some of us.

For example, my employer (major multi-national), and our immigration lawyers (Duane Morris), refuse to even consider going for a Green Card on E3 because it's not stated as dual intent. Argue as much as you want (and I know, because I have), but it doesn't help change their view.

They will happily support E3 -> H1B -> GC so the issue isn't the GC itself, just the "lack of dual intent" of E3...

ian-mstm

It's unfortunate that they refuse to educate themselves and that employees suffer as a result of their stubbornness. That they're unwilling to even try speaks volumes to their closed mindset! I'm sure that the company is benefiting by hiding behind the attorney's cowardice... after all, forcing H-1B as an interim keeps the employee in continued servitude for a good long while. Then again, perhaps that's what they were after all along.

Ian

sarp

This is too long to read and understand. Is this a good thing or bad thing? If so what are they?

ian-mstm

Yes, doing your own research is often like that.


I guess that depends on your needs.

Ian