• Hours & Info

    (562) 495-0554
    M-F: 8:00am - 6:00 p.m.
    Sat: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
  • Past Blog Posts

  • https://api.whatsapp.com/send?phone=13104885414

More PERM Reversals

  1. BALCA reversed the denial of the labor certification pursuant to its holdings in Matter of Chabad Lubavitch Center and Matter of Symantec Corporation. The Certifying Officer had denied the employer’s PERM application solely because the State Workforce Agency (SWA) job order and website posting did not state the geographic location with enough specificity to apprise applicants of travel requirements. BALCA held that this type of recruitment was not subject to 20 CFR §656.17(f).

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/balca/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/balca-denial/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/board-of-alien-labor-certification-appeals-balca/

https://californiaimmigration.us/balca-affirms-lc-denial-due-to-notice-of-filing-deficiency/

Good decision from BALCA

BALCA vacated the Certifying Officer’s (CO) denial of the employer’s application for labor certification and remanded, holding that the employer verified sponsorship upon signing the statement certifying the conditions of employment on the mailed-in application, even though the CO could not confirm the sponsorship because the CO was unable to make contact with the employer.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/balca/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/balca-denial/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/board-of-alien-labor-certification-appeals-balca/

https://californiaimmigration.us/balca-affirms-lc-denial-due-to-notice-of-filing-deficiency/

Don’t make small mistakes on PERM

  1. BALCA affirmed the denial of certification where the employer incorrectly entered the prevailing wage validity period on the ETA Form 9089 as less than the minimum 90 days required by 20 CFR §656.40(c). BALCA rejected the employer’s argument of harmless error, even though the prevailing wage determination issued by the State Workforce Agency did not include specific validity dates, and only indicated a validity period of “90 days from the date of this determination.”

Be careful if you own the company doing the PERM and you are also the beneficiary

BALCA affirmed the Certifying Officer’s denial of certification, finding that the employer did not establish that the job opportunity was open and available to all U.S. workers as required by 20 CFR §656.10(c)(8), where the beneficiary and her husband each had a 50% ownership interest in the sponsoring entity.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/perm-2/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/denial-of-perm/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/perm/

https://californiaimmigration.us/green-card/perm-employment-petition-for-immigration/

Get a Lawyer to help with PERM Advertising

BALCA affirmed the Certifying Officer’s denial of certification, finding that the employer’s failure to advertise the option of free housing, despite the employer’s argument that the benefit was normal to the occupation and could have been assumed, was an omission of a material aspect of employment that would influence whether or not a U.S. worker would apply for the job.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/perm-2/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/perm/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/perm-labor-certification/

https://californiaimmigration.us/green-card/perm-employment-petition-for-immigration/

PERM and Labor Certification Procedure must be exact

BALCA affirmed the denial of certification where the employer listed the name of the president of the company, but not name of the employer, on the Notice of Filing (NOF). Rejecting the employer’s harmless error argument, BALCA stated that, without the employer’s name in the NOF, “a person attempting to provide information to the Certifying Officer (CO) might not be able to inform the CO of the name of the employer as it appeared on the application.”

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/perm-2/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/denial-of-perm/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/conditional-permanent-resident/

https://californiaimmigration.us/green-card/perm-employment-petition-for-immigration/

The Certifying Officer can’t simply deny PERM without giving opportunity to explain

BALCA ordered that the denial of a labor certification be reversed and granted certification in a case where it was not clear on the ETA Form 9089 whether the beneficiary met the PERM job requirements, and stated that the certifying officer should have allowed the employer the opportunity to clarify the qualifications.

BALCA rules in favor of employee

BALCA ordered that certification be granted, concluding that individuals “matched” by a State Workforce Agency (SWA) to a job order are not considered applicants for the PERM position because they have not affirmatively applied for the job.

BALCA ordered that certification be granted, concluding that individuals “matched” by a State Workforce Agency (SWA) to a job order are not considered applicants for the PERM position because they have not affirmatively applied for the job.

BALCA reverses denial due to due process

BALCA denial

BALCA remanded the case for certification

BALCA affirms denial based on lack of proof of job order

Problem with PERM electronic inputting system

DOL posted an alert stating that on September 1, 2015, an update to the PERM case management system caused an unexpected programming glitch to occur, as a result of which, certain information could not be entered on the form. Until the revisions become operational, if you cannot complete and file an ETA Form 9089 online, you should mail in the application to the Atlanta National Processing Center.