Alan Lee, Esq. Q&As published on the World Journal Weekly on April 12, 2026: Someone would rarely ask for another EAD when he/she has one valid until 2030

Someone would rarely ask for another EAD when he/she has one valid until 2030

Reader asks:
My H-4 extension has been approved, but I received an RFE from USCIS for my H-4 EAD application. It says I already have an EAD valid until 2030 (this is the I-485 EAD I received a few weeks ago). They are asking why I am applying for another EAD (under the C29 H-4 category). I’m confused because the notice only gives me three options to choose from:

  1. The EAD card was lost or damaged.
  2. The information on the EAD card is incorrect and needs to be corrected;
  3. I want to withdraw this current application because I already have a valid EAD.

So, does having an I-485 EAD mean I can no longer apply for an H-4 EAD extension? Or did USCIS make a mistake by not recognizing that these are two different types of EADs? I want to write a letter to explain that this application is for the H-4 EAD because I don’t intend to use the I-485 EAD for now, and I don’t want to choose any of the three listed options. Is it okay to respond like this?

Mr. Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
We have seen situations in which individuals have held 2 EADs, but it is rare that someone would ask for another EAD when he or she has one valid until 2030. USCIS may be concerned about security (whether someone other than you could somehow use one of the cards) or if there is any problem with your I-485 application. Your explanation is probably as good a reason as any at the present and it will be up to USCIS whether it will issue the H-4 EAD.

IMMIGRATION NEWS THAT YOU CAN USE – PREDICTION ON SECOND ROUND OF H-1B SELECTIONS; PREVAILING WAGES LEVEL I-LEVEL IV SET TO LEAP UNDER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING; HABEAS CORPUS AND THE RIGHT TO BRING UP CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES TO AN IMMIGRATION JUDGE.

As published in the Immigration Daily on April 10, 2026

  1. Prediction on Second Round of H-1B Selections.

With the FY-2027 cap H-1B March selection completed, it appears from anecdotal evidence that the selection percentages as set out by USCIS in the weighted wage rule giving more opportunities (more lottery balls) to those organizations willing to pay beneficiaries on a higher wage level were incorrect. It had estimated odds for this year of level I – 15.29%, level II – 30.58%, level III – 45.87%, and level IV – 61.16%. (page 60948 of the Federal Register final rule, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-12-29/html/2025-23853.htm.) We believe that the final statistics will show higher percentages of approval. On the possibility of a second round of selections in July, we believe that there is a very distinct chance of this occurring. This depends upon whether many organizations actually go through with submitting H-1B petitions by June 30, 2026. On the one hand, there would appear to be more incentive for employers to file since they have already paid a $215 registration fee. On the other hand, some employers may have boxed themselves in with wages and SOC codes that they cannot realistically support. Also, it may well be that many organizations submitted H-1B registrations without fully taking into account or hoping that the $100,000 H-1B fee attached to those beneficiaries who are overseas or fail to successfully obtain a change of status to H-1B will be overturned by the courts. They may reconsider their commitment to file if there is no rule change. On the present status of the fee litigation, the District Court in Chamber of Commerce of the USA v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:25-cv-03675 (D.D.C. Dec. 23, 2025), upheld the fee and an appeal is currently in the DC Court of Appeals. The other two major cases, State of California v. Noem, 1-25cv-13829 (D.Mass.) and Global Nurse Force v. Trump, 4:25-cv-08454 (N.D.Cal.) remain pending.

  1. Prevailing Wages Level I-Level IV Set to Leap Under Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

The proposed regulation, “Improving Wage Protections for the Temporary and Permanent Employment of Certain Foreign Nationals in the United States”, Federal Register, vol. 91, No. 59 (3/27/26), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/03/27/2026-06017/improving-wage-protections-for-the-temporary-and-permanent-employment-of-certain-foreign-nationals  will raise prevailing wage levels I-IV excessively. Level I wages would move from the 17th percentile to the 34th percentile, level II from 34th to 52nd, level III from the 50th to 70th, and level IV from the 67th to the 88th. In practice, level I would be the most impacted with an approximate 33% jump in wages redefining entry-level somewhere closer to experienced/junior mid-level; level II will see an approximate 24% increase, level III 21%, and level IV 22%. Arguments against the proposal include DOL not sufficiently justifying why these specific percentile thresholds are appropriate; that the new wages based on the percentiles do not correspond to “prevailing wages” and in many cases exceed it; that it eliminates true entry-level wages; and promotes economic harms such as offshoring and reduced hiring by employers. Comments can be made electronically before May 26, 2026, to the Federal eRulemaking portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Commenters should identify the agency’s name and public docket number ETA-2026-0001, explain the reasons for any recommended changes, and reference the specific section and wording being addressed where possible.

  1. Habeas Corpus And The Right to Bring Up Constitutional Issues to an Immigration Judge.

Mahmoud Khalil, the permanent resident Columbia University protester who was seized and transported to Louisiana and later freed by the District Court in New Jersey through habeas corpus, had the habeas decision overturned in a Third Circuit panel decision on January 15, 2026 https://www.aclu.org/cases/khalil-v-trump?document=Order-Vacating-District-Court-Judgement. The decision is a huge blow against the use of habeas corpus petitions in immigration settings, the court saying that the INA does not allow immigrants to challenge by habeas corpus issues that can be reviewed in a petition for review at the circuit courts following disposition of the case by the immigration court and BIA. The exception is where the claims behind the habeas petition are “now or never” ones that would otherwise never come up for review. His legal team is now petitioning for en banc review and asking the new Third Circuit judge, Emil Bove, to recuse himself on grounds that that he was likely involved in decisions related to the case while at the Department of Justice. He was previously President Trump’s personal attorney handling matters including the hush money criminal case before Mr. Trump appointed him to the Department of Justice position and subsequently nominated him to the Third Circuit judgeship https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/01/nyregion/mahmoud-khalil-columbia-appeal.html . As a Trump loyalist, he will likely refuse to recuse himself.

A pivotal issue brought up by the dissent in the panel decision concerned the ability of the circuit court in Khalil’s case to meaningfully look at  the claimed violation of his First Amendment free speech rights since the immigration judge (IJ) held that she lacked jurisdiction to rule on constitutional challenges and so there was no opportunity to develop the record on that issue, particularly as the IJ repeatedly  denied his requests to do so. As disclosed in the dissent, the most interesting part of this discussion arose in oral argument before the panel when the government for the first time produced a September 2025 policy memorandum that immigration judges “may generally consider arguments arising out of constitutional law.” https://www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1413276/dl?inline  Prior to the agency memo, it had always been taken for granted by both DHS attorneys and respondents that neither immigration judges nor BIA would take up constitutional questions.

So it would appear that this could be used by lawyers to ask IJs to actually rule on constitutional issues although most immigration judges as members of the executive branch would likely decline to do so. It also seems a pity that the memorandum was apparently used here merely to give cover to the government attorney arguing before the court.

Alan Lee, Esq. Q&As published on the World Journal Weekly on April 5, 2026: If I am not selected in the H-1B lottery, can I apply for PERM?

If I am not selected in the H-1B lottery, can I apply for PERM?

Reader asks:
My husband found a job and the company helped apply for H-1B, but he hasn’t been selected in the lottery for three rounds. We are feeling hopeless.  I suddenly thought – can we skip the H-1B lottery and have the company file a PERM instead, while staying in the U.S.? My husband was born in South Korea, so there should be no backlog. Can someone on TN status directly file a PERM?

Mr. Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
Unfortunately, H-1B registration is not guaranteed, and it is not unusual that individuals can go multiple rounds and years in the H-1B lottery without being selected. It is best that individuals keep trying as we have seen persons who have failed multiple times finally be selected. If selected, H-1B holders can remain in the US for up to six years and perhaps even longer under such status. On your specific questions, the company can file a PERM application while you and your husband are staying in the US. Your husband would have to maintain legal non-immigrant status if he wishes to adjust status at the end of the process. A person on TN status can directly file for PERM, but that individual should be aware that travel outside the US even to Canada during the process may give him problems on entry  as as there is stricter vetting at the borders and TN unlike H1B requires non-immigrant intent.

Alan Lee, Esq. Q&As published on the World Journal Weekly on March 29, 2026 1. Labor certification applications can be restarted at any time. 2. The H-1B extension petition can only be filed within six months of its expiration date. 3. EB-1A and EB-1B can be submitted simultaneously if the contents of one do not contradict the other

1. Labor certification applications can be restarted at any time.

A reader asks:
I was just informed today that the labor market test failed, so the PERM process will need to restart. I’ll talk to the lawyer later for more details.  What are the common reasons for failing the labor market test? If I need to restart, do I have to wait 6 to 12 months? I’ve been at this company since graduating from university, and previously relocated to Canada for a year before returning to the U.S. this year, so the work experience used for the PERM comes from my time at the Canadian office.

Could the failed labor market test be related to that work experience? Or could it be related to the job location? For example, are there differences between the San Francisco Bay Area and New York in terms of passing the labor market test? I’m considering moving to New York next year.  If the PERM location is New York, would it be easier to get approved?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
I am sorry to hear that your labor certification market test failed. Common reasons are typographical errors (the PERM process is pretty strict on errors on the forms); the recruitment may not have been done correctly; there may have been able, willing, qualified, and available US workers that the employer was not able to screen out for valid job related reasons; the applicant’s qualifications may not have matched what was required on the labor certification application, etc. Generally speaking, a labor certification application can be begun again immediately and you generally do not have to wait 6 months or more to begin a new labor certification. If the labor certification requirements were only matched by you in the same company’s Canadian operation, such could be a reason for having a problem with the Department of Labor as experience gained in the same company should be in a position which is substantially different from the position being offered. On the question of San Francisco or New York, the question may be whether there are more qualified candidates who would be interested in a job like yours in San Francisco or New York. That goes to advertising the position and the company screening the candidates. If the position is remote, the test would be national rather than in Just the local market.

2. The H-1B extension petition can only be filed within six months of its expiration date.

A reader asks:
I checked the Department of Labor website, and the average PERM wait time is 17 months, so it’s unlikely I’ll get it within 12 months. I have two questions:

  1. Based on my situation, can I apply for a 1-year H-1B extension before it expires? If so, when is the earliest I can apply?
  2. Can recapture time be filed separately, or must it be submitted along with the H-1B extension?

Can I file a new H-1B extension before May 2026? I was outside the U.S. for almost two months during my H-1B six-year period, so those two months should push my H-1B expiry date further. My H-1B expires in May 2026, and my PERM was filed in May 2025 (PD). Although my PERM was filed within 365 days before my H-1B maxes out, it was only by one day. I thought I could apply for a one-year extension in May 2026 just because the PERM was filed 365 days before. But when I reread the AC21 rule, it seems I might not be eligible until 365 days after the PERM filing date, which would be May 2026.  If that’s true, I am worried I might fall out of status. What should I do?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
Based on your situation, you can apply for a one-year H-1B extension before it expires. The beginning of the requested time must be after the labor certification application has gone 365 days. The H-1B extension petition can only be filed within six months of its expiration date. You can also file to recapture time separately, but that would have to be in the form of an H-1B extension petition.

3. EB-1A and EB-1B can be submitted simultaneously if the contents of one do not contradict the other

A reader asks:
I have prepared all the materials and drafted my I-140 petition letter for EB-1A. I originally wanted to go through my employer’s EB-1B petition, as it seemed more stable.  However, my company’s law firm is moving too slowly. Should I file EB-1A on my own first? Can EB-1A and EB-1B be filed simultaneously?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
Both EB-1A and EB-1B can be filed simultaneously, but the contents of one cannot contradict the other. If you wish to file the EB-1A petition on your own, please ensure that it will be consistent with the claims made on the EB-1B petition.

Alan Lee, Esq. Q&As published on the World Journal Weekly on March 8, 2026 1. Under the new weighted wage rule, the chances of being selected are higher if you have a good wage offer 2. Received an RFE for the medical report  

1. Under the new weighted wage rule, the chances of being selected are higher if you have a good wage offer

A reader asks:
I have applied for the H-1B visa three times and haven’t been selected. This is my fourth attempt. I have been in the United States for 6 years and have renewed my TN visa several times. Currently, I am a graduate student in Canada, so I can only apply for the undergraduate H-1B. However, I am studying OMSCS on weekends, and I can apply for the Master’s Cap next year. Last month, I just renewed my TN visa, and the next renewal is due at the end of 2028. This gives me three more chances in the H-1B lottery. I’d like to ask, what are the chances of me getting selected in the next three years? It would be really frustrating if I don’t get selected after six attempts.

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
Under the new weighted wage rule, the chances of being selected are higher if you have a good wage offer. Assuming that the weighted wage rule is in place for this year’s H-1B Cap Registration, the higher the level of wage according to the Department of Labor (DOL) OES system, the better the chances are of being selected. DOL divides wages into four levels, and USCIS has conveniently taken advantage of the system in postulating that wages in level I get one ping-pong ball in the lottery, level II gets two balls, level III three balls, and level IV four balls. As you have been in the US for six years and renewed your TN Visa several times, you more than likely have a wage that fits within level III or level IV and have a good possibility of being selected.

2. Received an RFE for the medical report  

A reader asks:
I received an RFE today asking for my medical examination report.  However, I had already included the sealed medical report when I initially submitted my I-485 application. I called USCIS to inquire, but I was unable to reach a live agent. If my medical report was lost, can I ask my doctor to issue a new one?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
We find that in such situations where one cannot obtain an answer from USCIS, the best thing to do is to give another medical. If the medical is still valid, you can possibly go back to the physician or clinic and ask for a new medical report. You should ensure that you read all the rules concerning the validity of medicals before you take this route. Submission of an incorrect medical in response to a request for evidence would lead to denial.

Article: PERSONS ADMITTED TO U.S. AS REFUGEES DO NOT DESERVE THIS TREATMENT

As published in the Immigration Daily on March 3, 2026

What is a refugee? A person fleeing persecution. If coming to the US, a person who has been vetted constantly over a long period of time and when finally admitted, welcomed to the country and sponsored by private organizations to become acclimated to be a productive member of society.

So it was shocking to read the horror story inflicted by ICE on a refugee who had done all the right things since being admitted to this country. As reported in the January 29, 2026, New York Times article, “They Had Done Everything Right. ICE Detained Them Anyway,” https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/26/us/politics/ice-minnesota-refugees.html, a refugee Eritrean single mother of three in St. Paul, Selamawit Mehari, was taken from her apartment by ICE in the presence of her 13-year-old son and an older daughter who produced papers proving their mother was in the US lawfully, but they took her away anyway. The next day, chained at the wrists, waist and ankles, the mother was hustled off on a plane to a detention center in Texas. She spent five days in custody. Before Texas, she was told by ICE in Minnesota that she would be transferred to Texas and deported and whether she wanted to take her kids with her. An officer explained that she had been detained because she had not adjusted her status and her case would be reassessed. In Texas, she was given prison garments, rubber slippers and locked in a frigid room with other women with mattresses on the floor and thin metallic sheets to huddle under. She lost track of time. At some point, she was questioned for three hours with an interpreter on the line. The questions were the same questions that she had answered when she was approved to come to the US as a refugee. At the end of five days, she was released along with other refugees without money or identification and had to make her way from Texas back to Minnesota. Later that day, the family learned that her green card had been approved. The day after release, she still did not have her documents or her favorite gold chain which had been confiscated (at the price of gold these days, one hopes that ICE returned the chain).

Further shocking in the article were assertions that more than 100 refugees with no criminal records from about a dozen countries had been arrested in Minnesota by immigration agents in recent weeks and flown to detention centers in Texas for interviews.

And yet all became clear in a February 18, 2026, submission by the government to Judge John R. Tunheim of US District Court in Minnesota in the case of UHA v. Bondi, 26-CV-417-J RT-DLM containing a same-day USCIS/ICE memo, “Detention of Refugees Who Have Failed to Adjust to Lawful Permanent Resident Status” Feb 18 USCIS ICE Chamorro Memo.pdf – Google Drive, outlining how any refugee who had lived in the US for at least one year and not yet acquired permanent resident status could be arrested and detained by DHS.

The memo cites authority under the refugee adjustment statute, INA §209 (a) (1), that unadjusted refugees return or be returned to DHS custody for inspection and examination for admission to the US – that refugees may be considered to have voluntarily returned to custody by submitting an application to adjust status and appearing at scheduled interviews or appointments pertaining to their adjustment of status application – but if a refugee does not voluntarily return at the one-year mark, the statute provides that the alien shall be returned to DHS custody requiring DHS to locate, arrest, and take the alien into custody (page 3).

The statute clearly contemplates a process under which a refugee who has not acquired permanent resident status through other means and has been physically present in the US for at least one year should file for adjustment of status to permanent residence. The memo itself acknowledges filing to adjust status and appearing at scheduled interviews or appointments as compliance with the requirement of voluntarily returning to custody. The statute does not contemplate detention under such circumstances.

So the standard way in which refugees “return” is through applying for adjustment of status. However, they are not allowed to apply for adjustment of status until one year has passed since their admission as refugee. 8 CFR 209.1. On application, the average time for adjudication on adjustment of status is 12 months according to USCIS current processing times. https://egov.uscis.gov/processing-times/. Is an adjustment applicant protected from detention during the waiting period?  Apparently not, if the similar shanghaiings of Ms. Mehari and three other refugees mentioned in the New York Times article who had already applied to adjust status are examples.

How vetted are refugees before coming to the country? Heavily. The US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) includes biometric and biographic checks occurring at multiple stages throughout the process, including at the time of the preliminary resettlement support center interview, before applicants’ departure to the US, and on arrival in the US at the port of entry. Among the various checks are the Department of State Consular Lookout and Support System (CLASS) during prescreening by the resettlement support center including name checks on the applicant’s primary names as well as on any variations. Interagency checks vet applicants through biographic data, including names, dates of birth, and other data points of all refugee applicants within designated age ranges. Before or at the time of USCIS interview, biometric checks are initiated which include FBI fingerprint check through next-generation identification, DHS automated biometric identification system (IDENT), and Department of Defense biometric record check. Applicants then go through a USCIS refugee interview in which highly trained USCIS officers conduct extensive in-person, overseas interviews with all refugee applicants crosschecking many lines of inquiry and developing lines of questioning. National security concerns are handled under the USCIS Controlled Application Review and Resolution Process (CARRP) and enhanced review on certain refugee cases is done by the USCIS Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate (FDNS). Prior to flying to the US, applicants are further subject to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) vetting and inspection before being admitted to the country. https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-and-asylum/refugees/refugee-processing-and-security-screening

So these are individuals who should be given the presumption of not being threats against the interests of the United States. If the memo was due to the actions of Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29-year-old Afghan national accused of shooting two National Guard members in Washington, D.C in November 2025, the memo should be withdrawn because the circumstances of his reported case do not indicate that Mr. Lakanwal’s entry into the country was based on anything but the truth or that he was a secret sympathizer with America’s enemies. The known facts are that he helped the CIA in Afghanistan in an elite counterterrorism Zero Unit; was airlifted to the US under humanitarian parole in “Operation Allies Welcome” the month after the US military withdrew from Afghanistan; applied for and was granted asylum under the Trump administration in April 2025; and was reported to be struggling with psychological and economic problems, frustration and depression. A caseworker said that she personally believed that he was suffering from both PTSD from his work with the US military and possibly manic-depressive, mostly depressive. National Guard shooter’s social posts, messages reveal turmoil – The Washington Post.

The memo states that refugees may voluntarily appear for inspection by showing up in an immigration office or complying with scheduled appointments, yet this writer has not read or heard of USCIS sending out appointments for refugees to appear directly after one year of their admissions – neither has he heard that refugees can just appear at a USCIS office without appointment. Security guards at federal buildings typically turn away those without appointments, and even if making it past security, immigration officers usually do not have time or the means to accommodate those without appointments.

The nation should not be stigmatizing, detaining, attempting to deport, and transporting refugees to distant states in wretched conditions as this is treatment not even meted out to the worst criminals or suspected foreign agents. The memo appears to have only been contrived to terrorize the refugee community and to discourage their further legal stay in this country. It should be immediately withdrawn.

Alan Lee, Esq. Q&As published on the World Journal Weekly on March 1, 2026 1. The main benefit of switching from H-4 employment to H-1B is that you would not be dependent upon your spouse 2. EB-1A applications do not require Supplement J form 3. Incorrect occupation code in the State of Occupation Certificate (SOC) is not a basis to revoke an I-140 approval 4. Filing an NIW application is considered to have applied for an immigrant visa 

1. The main benefit of switching from H-4 employment to H-1B is that you would not be dependent upon your spouse

A reader asks:
I graduated with a master’s program in 2022 but did not get selected in the 2023 and 2024 H-1B lotteries. Since I only have one chance left and my spouse’s I-140 has already been obtained, I applied for an H-4 and recently received the H-4 EAD. Unexpectedly, my company has now offered to sponsor my H-1B and asked if I am interested. This is a pleasant surprise. For two reasons, I want the company to sponsor me. First, the H-4 work authorization rules may change in the next four years; second, I am concerned about potential gaps when ending my H-4 status in 3 years.  I also have some concerns: If I don’t get selected in the 2025 H-1B lottery, will it affect my H-4 EAD? As long as my H-4 EAD remains valid, can I continue entering the lottery every year? Are there any other advantages or disadvantages of switching from H-4 to H-1B?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
If those are your concerns with work authorization under the H-4 category, they should be alleviated by the fact that the Supreme Court recently refused to take up a challenge to the DC circuit decision protecting the right of H-4 dependents to work where qualified under the regulation. Please note a recent change, however, that the automatic extension rule for timing filed EAD renewals has been eliminated and that extensions should be filed as soon as possible (up to 180 days before the expiration date). On your concerns, being selected in the H-1B lottery has no effect upon H-4 EAD; you can continue entering the lottery every year and it would be best to keep legal status to avoid the possible imposing of a $100,000 fee if you are selected and a company decides to sponsor you for the H-1B petition; and the main benefit of switching from H-4 employment to H-1B is that this would now be your case, and you would not be dependent upon your spouse to maintain his or her H-1B status.

2. EB-1A applications do not require Supplement J form

A reader asks:
I filed my I-485 in November 2025, based on an EB-1A approved I-140. However, I was laid off by my company at the end of November 2025. In the past month or so since the layoff, I’ve been looking for a job, but because I don’t have a green card or work permit, I haven’t made much progress. I was thinking of waiting until I get my green card or work permit before looking for a job again. However, today I received a Request for Initial Evidence letter from the USCIS, asking me to submit Form Supplement J. My lawyer previously said that EB-1A or NIW cases don’t require submitting Form Supplement J. I am currently unemployed, how should I handle this?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
Your attorney is correct that Supplement J is not required for EB-1A filings. You should follow your attorney’s advice. The language in the I-485J instructions is the following:

NOTE: Individuals seeking or granted a National Interest Waiver of the job offer requirement and individuals seeking or granted classification as an alien of extraordinary ability under INA section 203(b)(1)(A) do not need to file Supplement J. Because these employment-based immigrant visa categories are not tied to a specific job offer, individuals seeking or granted classification as an alien of extraordinary ability or seeking or granted a National Interest Waiver of the job offer requirement do not have to file Supplement J when filing Form I-485 or to request job portability under INA section 204(j).

3. Incorrect occupation code in the State of Occupation Certificate (SOC) is not a basis to revoke an I-140 approval

A reader asks:
I’m preparing to file my I-485, and I just discovered that my I-140 was approved several years ago. The SOC code on the I-140 approval notice is incorrect; it should be 151132, but the notice shows 111132. I don’t know if USCIS made a mistake or if the law firm made a mistake in the application. The worst part is, the SOC code 111132 doesn’t even exist. How should I proceed? If USCIS made the mistake, can I simultaneously file the I-485 and request a correction to the I-140? If the law firm made the mistake in the application, how should I handle this?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
I believe that if you have the I-797 approval sheet, you can move forward with filing the I-485. Whether it was your attorney’s or USCIS’s error with the SOC code, that would likely be considered an error of little consequence. If USCIS wanted to check the record, it could open theI-140 petition file and take whatever action that it deems appropriate. Having a wrong SOC code on the approval sheet is not a basis to revoke an I-140 approval.

4. Filing an NIW application is considered to have applied for an immigrant visa 

A reader asks:
I am a STEM PhD student, and my seniors are applying for NIW (National Interest Waiver) or EB-1 (Outstanding Talent) because they are about to graduate. Many people suggest that I use NIW to apply for a green card and occupy a priority date. I have published 7 articles and have dozens of citations, but my F-1 visa has expired, and I need to renew it abroad. My question: Will submitting an NIW application affect my future F-1 renewal or entry into the United States?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
A F-1 student visa applicant must show nonimmigrant intent and the DS-160 visa application form asks whether you have applied for an immigrant visa petition. You must answer in the affirmative if you have already applied for an NIW I-140 petition. Otherwise, you may be deemed to have committed fraud or misrepresentation in the application. A consular officer will consider the factor of your having applied for an immigrant visa petition in his or her decision of whether to allow renewal of the F-1 visa.

Alan Lee, Esq. Q&As published on the World Journal Weekly on February 22, 2026 1. Can I transfer to Day 1 CPT when my H-1B expires? 2. The I-140 petition must be filed within 180 days of PERM approval.

1. Can I transfer to Day 1 CPT when my H-1B expires?

A reader asks:
My H-1B expires in September this year, and my company insists on starting the PERM application in the second half of this year. I’d be lucky to even get a PWD before it expires. In this situation, can I use Day 1 CPT to maintain my employment? If so, do I need to maintain CPT until the I-140 is approved, or until I get my green card?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
Yes, I agree that it would be very difficult for you to even get the prevailing wage determination by September if the company will not begin your PERM process until the second half of this year and your H-1B will be expiring in September (I assume that the expiration that you are talking about is for the six year limit on H-1B’s). For you to use Day One CPT, you would first have to change to F-1 student. You should also be aware that USCIS generally frowns on the practice and may give problems to your case in the future if you move in the direction, especially if your intended schooling is on the same level as your present degree. On your other question, you may hopefully be able to change back to H-1B when your labor certification application has been pending for one year or the I-140 petition is approved.

2. The I-140 petition must be filed within 180 days of PERM approval.

A reader asks:
My initial understanding was that H-1B visas could be renewed indefinitely under the following three circumstances: If a 1-year or 3-year PERM application is submitted and not approved after one year, it can be renewed for one year. After I-140 approval, it can be renewed for three years. However, I consulted a lawyer today, and she said she had never heard of the first situation. What’s going on? They handle all EB cases at their law firm, so they shouldn’t be unaware of this, right? Also, if the PERM is approved, but the I-140 hasn’t been filed yet, can I still renew my H-1B?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
Perhaps you did not express yourself clearly to the attorney, but you are correct that under AC- 21, a H-1B can be extended past the normal six year period of time if a labor certification has been going on for a year in which case the H-1B can be extended for one year. Where the I-140 has been approved, a three year extension can be requested so long as the priority date is not current. To your question of whether you can still extend the H-1B if the PERM is approved but the I-140 not yet filed, such can be done as long as 365 days have passed the PERM was filed. Kindly remember that the I-140 petition must be filed within 180 days of PERM approval.

Alan Lee, Esq. Q&As published on the World Journal Weekly on February 8, 2026 1. Whether adding a derivative beneficiary will slow down green card processing timeline? 2. Being laid off does not necessarily invalidate an EB-1A visa.

1. Whether adding a derivative beneficiary will slow down green card processing timeline?

A reader asks:
I submitted I-485 a year ago and was RFE. In the meantime, I got married, and now I want to add my spouse to my I-485.  I have seen posts mentioning that this can be done either through the “follow-to-join” process or by adding a derivative beneficiary to your existing I-485 application. Which option is more reasonable?

My main concern is whether adding a derivative beneficiary will slow down my green card processing timeline. Will it take longer to approve my case if I add my spouse now? Will my spouse receive a green card later if we use the “follow-to-join” process?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
Follow to join is usually a process to allow the spouse to consular process his or her case overseas after the principal has received permanent residence. Adding your spouse to your I-485 means that your spouse will be filing an I-485 application on her own based upon your case. It is difficult to say what will happen to your case in terms of delay in that situation, but there is a possibility that USCIS may wish to request evidence or interview both of you to determine the bona fide nature of your marital relationship.

2. Being laid off does not necessarily invalidate an EB-1A visa.

A reader asks:
I have a feeling I might be laid off, so I want to prepare in advance. Last year, the company’s law firm applied for an EB-1A for me, but I got a Request for Evidence (RFE). USCIS accepted two of the supplementary documents. I submitted the required documents by the end of October last year. Last week, I asked about the case status, and the law firm said they are still working on it and plan to submit it by the end of this month. If I am laid off on February 10th and lose my company email, will my application still be valid? Can I use my personal email address to contact them?

Alan Lee, Esq. answers,
I assume that the company law firm will continue to work on and submit your RFE response on a timely basis. If you are laid off by the company, the validity of the EB-1A filing may depend upon whether you are both the petitioner and beneficiary, or whether the company put itself down as the petitioner. If the company is the petitioner, then your petition would be invalid unless the company still wishes to continue the sponsorship despite laying you off. The company at some point in the future would have to assert that it still has a permanent job available for you if you wish to continue to the immigrant visa or I-485 stage. If you are both petitioner and beneficiary, the case can continue. Whether you are able to stay in contact with the company law firm depends upon the arrangement between you and the company. Whether you can continue to receive updates on your case directly from USCIS depends upon whether you are listed as the petitioner. If so, USCIS will send you a separate notice.

Alan Lee, Esq. Q&As published on the World Journal Weekly on February 1, 2026 1. USCIS is giving additional scrutiny to nationals of China who graduated from one of China’s “Seven National Defense Universities”.

1. USCIS is giving additional scrutiny to nationals of China who graduated from one of China’s “Seven National Defense Universities”.

A reader asks:
I graduated from one of China’s “Seven National Defense Universities,” and I applied for EB-3 (downgrade). Both my spouse and I applied. 400 days have passed, and our case is still pending. We received our combo cards in March 2025, and there have been no other updates since then. Last October, the priority date retrogressed, but it became current again in January of this year. Our fingerprints were taken 400 days ago, and we still haven’t heard anything. Should I write to my congressman?

Alan Lee Esq answers,
As you are aware, USCIS is giving additional scrutiny to nationals of China who graduated from one of China’s “Seven National Defense Universities”. It is thus not surprising that your I-485 adjustment of status processing is taking so long. If you or your legal representative have not already done so already, you for your legal representative can contact USCIS at its customer service center at 1-800-375-5283 or make an E-Request electronically at https://egov.uscis.gov/e-request/ if the processing time has exceeded posted current times. If you have already done so, then you may certainly wish to contact your local US representative or senator to look into your case.