Copyright 2017. Law Office of Carlo Borja. Disclaimer

Carlo Franco L. Borja is a licensed attorney in California and is authorized to represent clients in immigration matters nationwide. Based in Southern California, the immigration law firm serves clients mainly in Los Angeles County, Orange County, San Bernardino County and Riverside County including, but not limited to: Agoura Hills, Alhambra, Arcadia, Artesia, Avalon, Azusa, Baldwin Park, Bell Gardens, Bellflower, Beverly Hills, Burbank, Calabasas, Carson, Cerritos, Claremont, Commerce, Culver City, Diamond Bar, Downey, Duarte, Eagle Rock, El Monte, El Segundo, Gardena, Glendale, Glendora, Hawaiian Gardens, Hawthorne, Huntington Park, Industry, Inglewood, Irwindale, La Habra, La Mirada, La Puente, La Verne, Lakewood, Lancaster, Lawndale, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Lynwood, Malibu, Manhattan Beach, Monrovia, Montebello, Monterey Park, Norwalk, Palmdale, Palos Verdes, Paramount, Pasadena, Pico Rivera, Pomona, Redondo Beach, Rosemead, San Dimas, San Fernando, San Gabriel, San Marino, Santa Clarita, Santa Fe Springs, Santa Monica, Temple City, Torrance, Vernon, Walnut, West Covina, Hollywood, Westlake Village, Whittier, Anaheim, Brea, Buena Park, Costa Mesa, Fullerton, Garden Grove, Huntington Beach, Irvine, La Habra, La Palma, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, Mission Viejo, Newport Beach, Orange, Santa Ana, Stanton, Tustin, Westminster, Adelanto, Chino, Chino Hills, Colton, Fontana, Hesperia, Highland, Loma Linda, Montclair, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Rialto, San Bernardino, Upland, Victorville, Corona, Eastvale, Hemet, Indio, Lake Elsinore, Menifee, Moreno Valley. Murrieta, Norco, Perris, Palm Springs, Riverside, Temecula and surrounding areas. Filipino Immigration lawyer representing clients in all US states: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

Pursuant to the Administrative Appeals Office's (AAO) precedent decision, Matter of Simeio Solutions, LLC (Simeio), dated April 9, 2015, USCIS released final guidance on July 21, 2015 (PM-602-0120), detailing when an amended or new H1B petition shall be filed before placing an H-1B employee at a new place of employment not covered by an existing, approved H-1B petition.

The salient points of the memo are as follows:

A petitioner must file an amended or new H-1B petition if the H-1B employee is changing his or her place of employment to a geographical area requiring a corresponding LCA to be certified to USCIS, even if a new LCA is already certified by the U.S. Department of Labor and posted at the new work location.

A petitioner does NOT need to file an amended petition in the following situations:

The move is within the same “area of intended employment.” See INA section 212(n)(4); 20 CFR 655.734. Note however that the petitioner must still post the original LCA in the new work location within the same area of intended employment. For example, an H-1B employee presently authorized to work at a location within the New York City metropolitan statistical area (NYC) may not trigger the need for a new LCA if merely transferred to a new worksite in NYC, but the petitioner would still need to post the previously obtained LCA at the new work location. See 20 CFR 655.734. This is required regardless of whether an entire office moved from one location to another within NYC, or just the one H-1B employee.
Short-term placements: Under certain circumstances, a petitioner may place an H-1B employee at a new worksite for up to 30 days, and in some cases 60 days (where the employee is still based at the "home" worksite), without obtaining a new LCA. See 20 CFR 655.735.
Non-worksite locations: If H-1B employees are only going to a non-worksite location and there are no material changes in the authorized employment, the petitioner does not need to file an amended or new H-1B petition. A location is considered to be a “non-worksite” if: The H-1B employees are going to a location to participate in employee developmental activity, such as management conferences and staff seminars; The H-1B employees spend little time at any one location; or; The job is “peripatetic in nature,” such as situations where their job is primarily at one location but they occasionally travel for short periods to other locations “on a casual, short-term basis, which can be recurring but not excessive (i.e., not exceeding 5 consecutive workdays for any one visit by a peripatetic worker, or 10 consecutive workdays for any one visit by a worker who spends most work time at one location and travels occasionally to other locations).” See 20 CFR 655.715.

The USCIS memo clarifies, but does not depart from, existing regulations and previous agency policy pronouncements on when an amended H-1B petition must be filed. The USCIS memo provides guidance to accommodate petitioners who need to come into compliance with Simeio. Click here to view PM-602-0120.