arunkotte
07-29 08:22 AM
How can we figure out the net assets from a 1120S tax return? I have the copy of company tax return with me and I am "accounting challenged". Can some one please help me figure out the net assets, so that I can answer my ability to pay RFE.
Thanks
Thanks
wallpaper justin bieber purple glasses
munnu77
06-11 03:06 PM
Firstly, I am not a lawyer and I would recommend that you get a lawyer to help out.
As mentioned before this is a civil lawsuit and not a crimial lawsuit. Impact on GC should not be a factor but consult an immigration lawyer.
Now depending on the state law you should not be liable for Cars2 through Cars7. It could easily be argued that they did not leave a safe distance between them and hence the ripple effect. What the insurance determines is the fault is not necessarily how the law would interpret it. So if you insurance of any of the car insurance assign percentages of fault, it is pretty much based on their calculations. Did you recieve a traffic citation? If so did it indicate that you were at fault for all the subsequent accidents? Did you contest the citation? If so what was the outcome. If you contested the citation and got the charges dropped you have a stronger case against each of the other plaintiffs.
Try to settle out of court and get the lawyers to drop the case. The way you do that is to claim that you don't have any money. Remember the lawyers for each of the plaintiffs have done an asset check on you and they know how much you have. Although the judge could request that each of the transactions to reverse. Do the following:
Read this post: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=249649#post249649
1. Take out second mortage on the house (if you own it) and transfer cash to a relative's name in India
2. Sell cars and lease new cars
3. Cash savings etc should be transferred to relative's names in India.
Show the lawyers you don't have any money and they will not be able to recover their fees from this lawsuit. Do not capitualte to threats. Instead offer to settle out of court. Let them come up with the offer and then bargain like hell.
I hope this helps. If you need to talk more send me a private message.
just curious..y cant he put his money in his bank account in india..
do american law have control over indian banks or can they check his assets in india..do they have the power to do tht..
i thought they can only mess with hos assts inside USA
As mentioned before this is a civil lawsuit and not a crimial lawsuit. Impact on GC should not be a factor but consult an immigration lawyer.
Now depending on the state law you should not be liable for Cars2 through Cars7. It could easily be argued that they did not leave a safe distance between them and hence the ripple effect. What the insurance determines is the fault is not necessarily how the law would interpret it. So if you insurance of any of the car insurance assign percentages of fault, it is pretty much based on their calculations. Did you recieve a traffic citation? If so did it indicate that you were at fault for all the subsequent accidents? Did you contest the citation? If so what was the outcome. If you contested the citation and got the charges dropped you have a stronger case against each of the other plaintiffs.
Try to settle out of court and get the lawyers to drop the case. The way you do that is to claim that you don't have any money. Remember the lawyers for each of the plaintiffs have done an asset check on you and they know how much you have. Although the judge could request that each of the transactions to reverse. Do the following:
Read this post: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=249649#post249649
1. Take out second mortage on the house (if you own it) and transfer cash to a relative's name in India
2. Sell cars and lease new cars
3. Cash savings etc should be transferred to relative's names in India.
Show the lawyers you don't have any money and they will not be able to recover their fees from this lawsuit. Do not capitualte to threats. Instead offer to settle out of court. Let them come up with the offer and then bargain like hell.
I hope this helps. If you need to talk more send me a private message.
just curious..y cant he put his money in his bank account in india..
do american law have control over indian banks or can they check his assets in india..do they have the power to do tht..
i thought they can only mess with hos assts inside USA
laksmi
11-24 06:17 PM
i am working on H1B and my wife is on H4, she was not included in 485 yet so she is not having EAD, can i change status from H1B to EAD, please advice.
2011 justin bieber purple glasses
VA2008
03-26 05:14 PM
I got a Soft LUD too on March 25th,2009. Probably routine scanning of applications to check if all documents are there or not. My receipt date is July18th,2007 btw.
more...
indiadivided
02-14 10:36 AM
I think Mr. MACACA, it will better if this word (Macaca) is not repeated, since promoting this word might convert this into a word for Indians like the N word. So get your nick changed.
I have read the above book and other books (lateral thinking, ...) by Edward de bono; he has written a lot of (non expensive) books. I strongly recommend his books to the open minded reader.
I should also be banned soon. My post was not published on Friday. I did not praise logiclife for the Friday episode. I do understand that my question's will not get answered.
On the other hand, I see absolutely no content in anand26's posts. Such posts are a complete waste of time for our cause.
I have read the above book and other books (lateral thinking, ...) by Edward de bono; he has written a lot of (non expensive) books. I strongly recommend his books to the open minded reader.
I should also be banned soon. My post was not published on Friday. I did not praise logiclife for the Friday episode. I do understand that my question's will not get answered.
On the other hand, I see absolutely no content in anand26's posts. Such posts are a complete waste of time for our cause.
sweet23guyin
12-02 12:56 AM
Like many other technology forums, you need to be a paid member to see any premium content, else only part of the message is visible...that makes every one a paid member...we can have a similar setup to see a senior member post...that way every post from a senior members will generate revenue and in turn more money for lobbying!
Eg: www.dsxchange.com, this site used to be a free site a couple of year ago; as the content grows members too soared in no time. Now, it is mandatory to pay yearly to read and ask/reply seniors members posts, else u will only read junior member posts.
We are 25k strong! Just to remind, Microsoft bought hotmail paying millions not for the lousy hotmail software, it is for the huge members that has already signed up by then.
In our case we have to make things mandatory for obvious reasons. I strongly think the word donation/contribution doesn’t work, if it could have worked we wouldn’t have this discussion after so many requests. It is time to make things mandatory, please :(.
Eg: www.dsxchange.com, this site used to be a free site a couple of year ago; as the content grows members too soared in no time. Now, it is mandatory to pay yearly to read and ask/reply seniors members posts, else u will only read junior member posts.
We are 25k strong! Just to remind, Microsoft bought hotmail paying millions not for the lousy hotmail software, it is for the huge members that has already signed up by then.
In our case we have to make things mandatory for obvious reasons. I strongly think the word donation/contribution doesn’t work, if it could have worked we wouldn’t have this discussion after so many requests. It is time to make things mandatory, please :(.
more...
obviously
07-15 10:42 PM
Folks -
Two pronged approach to fix Lou's bigotry:
1. Mail an empty trashbag to Lou Dobbs, to reach by July 31
Let us each mail an empty trashbag with a covering note highlighting how biased and untrue his 'reporting' is.
Mail to:
Trashbags for Lou Dobbs Senseless Bigotry
1 CNN Ctr
NW Atlanta,
GA 30303
(or)
Trashbags for Lou Dobbs Senseless Bigotry
One CNN Center, Box 105366, Atlanta GA 30303
Imagine, what THOUSANDS OF TRASH BAGS would do in terms of media coverage and buzz!
Trashbag = $0.05
Mailing = $0.39
Opportunity to remedy the bigotry = PRICELESS
2. File online complaints at following direct links!
Report Errors on CNN TV
Send an online report NOW (http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form6a.html?2)
Send a story idea (on high skill legal immigration)
Link here (http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form11b.html?2)
Lou Dobbs Tonight - Comment on the show
Link here (http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?76)
"]http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?76 (http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?76)
These will be more effective than trying to boycott Toyota, or other advertisers. Let us get direct and rebuke CNN for their shameless attacks on high skilled hardworking immigrants who continue the tradition of working towards the Great American Dream.
Cheers!
Two pronged approach to fix Lou's bigotry:
1. Mail an empty trashbag to Lou Dobbs, to reach by July 31
Let us each mail an empty trashbag with a covering note highlighting how biased and untrue his 'reporting' is.
Mail to:
Trashbags for Lou Dobbs Senseless Bigotry
1 CNN Ctr
NW Atlanta,
GA 30303
(or)
Trashbags for Lou Dobbs Senseless Bigotry
One CNN Center, Box 105366, Atlanta GA 30303
Imagine, what THOUSANDS OF TRASH BAGS would do in terms of media coverage and buzz!
Trashbag = $0.05
Mailing = $0.39
Opportunity to remedy the bigotry = PRICELESS
2. File online complaints at following direct links!
Report Errors on CNN TV
Send an online report NOW (http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form6a.html?2)
Send a story idea (on high skill legal immigration)
Link here (http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form11b.html?2)
Lou Dobbs Tonight - Comment on the show
Link here (http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?76)
"]http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?76 (http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?76)
These will be more effective than trying to boycott Toyota, or other advertisers. Let us get direct and rebuke CNN for their shameless attacks on high skilled hardworking immigrants who continue the tradition of working towards the Great American Dream.
Cheers!
2010 justin bieber glasses real.
willigetagc
08-26 12:26 PM
Why cannot they just say it?. Why can’t they say that it will take 2 days to 22 days or 222 days to transfer the amount?, if someone needs to send money due to an emergency, they do it thinking that the money will be transferred in two or three days, a week maybe…
Beats me! I don't know why they (the indians) do that. They make agressive promises and then fail to meet them. They should adopt the US business style of promising results in 5-7 business days and then deliver in 3-4 days. It then becomes the customer's headache to plan accordingly and they (the customers) are in fact delighted to get the work done in 3-4 days.
(Never mind the fact that the work would actually take them less than 1-2 bus day ;))
Beats me! I don't know why they (the indians) do that. They make agressive promises and then fail to meet them. They should adopt the US business style of promising results in 5-7 business days and then deliver in 3-4 days. It then becomes the customer's headache to plan accordingly and they (the customers) are in fact delighted to get the work done in 3-4 days.
(Never mind the fact that the work would actually take them less than 1-2 bus day ;))
more...
eb3_nepa
03-12 10:33 PM
Thanks for the replies everyone.
In response to some responses, i am not "overly concerned" I was just wondering what their status was.
If the older core members who have received their GCs are indeed enjoying the fruits of their hard work, God bless them and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. My intent was never to start a hot debate. God knows we have tons of drama on the forums daily!! ;). (Soon the April VB will be released and more drama)
In response to some responses, i am not "overly concerned" I was just wondering what their status was.
If the older core members who have received their GCs are indeed enjoying the fruits of their hard work, God bless them and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. My intent was never to start a hot debate. God knows we have tons of drama on the forums daily!! ;). (Soon the April VB will be released and more drama)
hair house justin bieber purple
GCwaitforever
03-13 09:59 AM
Defintely good news. Now that namecheck problem is gone, we see bit of movement.
more...
chanukya
02-06 10:37 AM
Though they run for non-profit.
So public schools Elem/Middle/High , still have to go thru nornal H1B process for teachers, have to wait for OCT1, start date.
School is non-profit organization that is exempt from H1B quota. Correct me if I am wrong.
You can get H1B at any time if school is exempt from H1B quota.
So public schools Elem/Middle/High , still have to go thru nornal H1B process for teachers, have to wait for OCT1, start date.
School is non-profit organization that is exempt from H1B quota. Correct me if I am wrong.
You can get H1B at any time if school is exempt from H1B quota.
hot purple justin bieber glasses.
chanduv23
07-19 10:24 AM
We would be happy to know from core that your expenses have been reimbursed. I am sure, Jwalant, Himanshu, Prsatik etc.. all have contributed apart from Aman.
Offcourse the time spent cannot be reimbursed, but definitely money can. Its wrong on part that one has to shed so much money.
Offcourse the time spent cannot be reimbursed, but definitely money can. Its wrong on part that one has to shed so much money.
more...
house Post image for Justin Bieber
Leo07
11-01 04:25 PM
I think this will be viewed more as a blackmailing method than anything else.
Moreover, if you look at the history of past such movements( LOL ), this is 180 degrees inverse of those successful movements.
I'm a firm believer in GC success through lobbying.
Moreover, if you look at the history of past such movements( LOL ), this is 180 degrees inverse of those successful movements.
I'm a firm believer in GC success through lobbying.
tattoo That#39;s right, Justin Bieber
h1b_alex
03-29 03:43 PM
@snathan oh no he never got me any interviews , he was basking away in the sun with his wife on the hammock with him, these were all my efforts of trying to find a job somewhere by posting on job sites, calling up companies, using my friend's reference, but i realize that even doing that companies here follow a longer process or some no process to actually keep the candiate informed about the status. This was way different in my home country.
anyways yeah i know atleast 5 guys who have all been thru this company who have all flown in on their own and who did not blow the whistle.
anyways yeah i know atleast 5 guys who have all been thru this company who have all flown in on their own and who did not blow the whistle.
more...
pictures makeup justin bieber glasses
willwin
08-11 05:08 PM
^^^^^^
dresses hair justin bieber purple glasses justin bieber with glasses smiling. justin
Macaca
02-07 08:59 PM
The SKIL bill included US Master's and Ph.D's.
Any special benefits for US Ph D? Do you agree with previous assesment by rimzhim? Have you read SKILL? Thanks.
Any special benefits for US Ph D? Do you agree with previous assesment by rimzhim? Have you read SKILL? Thanks.
more...
makeup justin bieber 3d glasses for
rheoretro
11-12 02:11 PM
Was just watching Late Edition on CNN..with Arlen Specter and Chuck Schumer.. Specter did mention that he expects the CIR to be passed in the next few weeks in the lame duck session by the house.. infact he mentioned that the conservative outgoing speaker Hastert in favour of this at this time..so house might pass this now..with the senate already passed this..
Lets see who this goes ..
Rule #1 in politics: don't believe a word of what a politician says until you see those words translated into concrete actions.
As for Dennis Hastert, who cares what he has to say now. Sayonara.:D
Lets see who this goes ..
Rule #1 in politics: don't believe a word of what a politician says until you see those words translated into concrete actions.
As for Dennis Hastert, who cares what he has to say now. Sayonara.:D
girlfriend A meet and glasses are
extra_mint
04-24 01:12 PM
I totally support banishing country quota. It is totally unfair specially to folks from India/China/Mexico and others (in EB category).
However if we analyze the current mess. Following are some of the things that led to it
First of all 65K is the number of H1-B's that are issued every year. Lets assume all of 65K applies for GC >> then we get 65 K * 2.2 (dependents) = 143K GC's.
Then how come we have such a big backlog.
1. H1b visa ceiling was increased to 195K during the tech boom of 2000's but they never increased the EB based green card (it remained 140K)
2. Wastage of EB visa by USCIS. Some estimates are in range of 500K. But let's say they wasted half of it (250K). This should be sufficient to clear the backlog.
3. Third of last few years with rise in economies of India and china and ROW, we have seen an increase in the L1's (globalization). I totally agree with this and have no issues with L1's. And many of L1's decide to stay in US. And of course GC comes from EB category.
Simple logic is H1-B non-immigrant visa has been recognized as dual intent, which means holders of H1B can legally apply for GC.
On the other hand Congress and US govt have failed to provide adequate GC for EB. The system is a total chaos now for all the above reasons.
This is what we need to communicate to congress/us govt and if required challenge in court.
Can't agree less with you pappu:)
However if we analyze the current mess. Following are some of the things that led to it
First of all 65K is the number of H1-B's that are issued every year. Lets assume all of 65K applies for GC >> then we get 65 K * 2.2 (dependents) = 143K GC's.
Then how come we have such a big backlog.
1. H1b visa ceiling was increased to 195K during the tech boom of 2000's but they never increased the EB based green card (it remained 140K)
2. Wastage of EB visa by USCIS. Some estimates are in range of 500K. But let's say they wasted half of it (250K). This should be sufficient to clear the backlog.
3. Third of last few years with rise in economies of India and china and ROW, we have seen an increase in the L1's (globalization). I totally agree with this and have no issues with L1's. And many of L1's decide to stay in US. And of course GC comes from EB category.
Simple logic is H1-B non-immigrant visa has been recognized as dual intent, which means holders of H1B can legally apply for GC.
On the other hand Congress and US govt have failed to provide adequate GC for EB. The system is a total chaos now for all the above reasons.
This is what we need to communicate to congress/us govt and if required challenge in court.
Can't agree less with you pappu:)
hairstyles ieber in purple glasses.
tampacoolie
07-21 08:07 AM
My company got an RFE for ability to pay from USCIS. we are responding back with my companies 2006 tax returns and w-2 which shows more than proffered wage determined by Dept of Labor during PERM. I hope this should be fine and I will get a favorable response.
My concern is whether I should apply for 485 or should I wait till 140 approval to apply for 485.
please advice.
I also got an I-140 REF on A2P. USCIS requested my company's 2006 Tax Return, my 2006 W2 and 3 latest pay stubs. I am still waiting for my employer's tax return, However I am going to apply I485.
My concern is whether I should apply for 485 or should I wait till 140 approval to apply for 485.
please advice.
I also got an I-140 REF on A2P. USCIS requested my company's 2006 Tax Return, my 2006 W2 and 3 latest pay stubs. I am still waiting for my employer's tax return, However I am going to apply I485.
kumsoft
07-26 07:05 PM
2006 PD filers dont worry abt spouse 485. Your PD would become available only after couple of years. My PD is Sept 2005 and I dont anticipate to get my GC within 2yrs. For reference look at the PERM data that is published, you would get a good idea.
unitednations
03-31 11:51 AM
I (and I�m sure others too) would like to know how the following works,
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.