EAD

[Achromatic 0]

Okay, before I start this, I realize that USCIS / INA stuff "trumps" SSA, but apropos of anything else, this is fairly explicit:

RM 00203.500 Employment Authorization for Nonimmigrants (https://s044a90.ssa.gov/apps10/poms.nsf/lnx/0100203500)

"Required evidence for employment authorization is either a Form I-94, Arrival/Departure Record, showing a class of admission that indicates the person can work without specific DHS authorization (RM00203.500C.1.) or an employment authorization document (EAD) (Form I-766 or I-688B)."

"1. General - Evidence of Employment Authorization

Employment authorization for nonimmigrants can be determined by:

* the alien's class of admission code as shown on the I-94 (the non-immigrant classifications shown on the I-94 with employment authorization inherent in status are listed in RM 00203.500C.1.); or"

...

"NOTE: DHS does not issue EAD cards to aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence or nonimmigrants whose work authorization is incident to their class of admission."

"1. Aliens Work Authorized Without Specific DHS Authorization

The following sections list nonimmigrants, by alien class of admission codes, who are authorized to work in the U.S. without specific authorization from DHS. The person’s I-94 will not have the DHS employment authorization stamp and the alien will generally not have an EAD. "

"K-1 Fiancé(e) of U.S. citizen"

That's pretty specific, from SSA's perspective - that within the first 90 days you need NOTHING, no EAD, other than your I-94 K-1 stamped to be able to work in the US.

In fact, whilst most people don't consider the interim EAD (because processing times are almost always above 90 days, rendering the concept moot), SSA specifically states that DHS won't issue one if you're K-1, anyway.

[rebeccajo 14]

So round and round we go like a cat chasing its tail.

Achromatic, I believe what you have given us here is the SS interpretation to its employees as to why it is OK for them to issue a Social Security number to a K1.

It's not an interpretation of whether or not a K1 who worked without specific DHS authorizaiton will be able to adjust status after their immigrant visa has expired.

Edited February 17, 2007 by rebeccajo

[Achromatic 0]

For final "closure" (ha, ha) of this topic, I want to express the end result of my experiences, as just posted to another thread:

"

So while the employee may not have told the truth, the employer is expected to have made a "reasonable person"'s effort in ensuring that said documentation sighted was accurate.

I'm saying that my wife DID tell the truth; "I can only work until November 8th". And, the employer did the due diligence to verify that my wife was eligible to work; based on her I-94 temporary stamp. So, both did the correct thing at the time of employment. My question is what happens on November 9th -- if my wife does not "remind" them of her temporary EA end date and the employer forgets the same and continues to schedule her. Who is responsible for ensuring her eligibility to work? I say the employer, but that's just in my humble opinion.

Thanks.

So is it considered illegal for the non-USC spouse to continue working past the 90-day EAD temp stamp? My husband wants to keep working but I just don't know if its worth the risk...

As I mentioned, it is documented, in procedure/law, not just subject-to-opinion, that illegal overstay or unauthorized employment can NOT be used as the grounds for the denial of Adjustment of Status, or when applying for Naturalization (though this may change).

You can be sure, though, that if either comes to the attention of USCIS/DHS, your next appointment / interview with them will spend a fair amount of time discussing your knowledge of the infraction you committed, and how complicit you were therein.

Again, however, if the adjudicating officer chooses to deny your application, this can NOT be the reason, though you might face a far more tight interrogation on other aspects of your relationship as a result thereof.

I am going to go out on a limb and say that I worked without authorization, unknowingly. I am also going to say that I did continue to do so after I received advice that I had been doing so.

I am also going to say this, and this is one thing that a lot of people here will caution against, as a general rule.

My partner is, or was at our AOS application, a student, that I was supporting. In or around that time, I started questioning whether K-1 Authorization was actual Employment Authorization, and the consensus was that it was not, that, though eligible, I would still have to apply.

I filed AOS with a joint sponsor, my fiance's mother.

I filed documents showing that I had been working, showing my income and assets as gained in the US, through unauthorized work.

The end result:

We got RFE'd.

One (of the five) pages (the others were for further proof of my joint sponsor's citizenship and tax info), stated that if I wished to use my income as part of this support statement, I had to show valid employment authorization, and had not done so.

Given that data matching, etc, etc, common sense re "EADs not processed within the initial 90 day K-1 period", etc, etc, that was made saying "You aren't authorized to work, so we cannot count any income you've claimed".

I had my AOS interview on Thursday.

What mention of this was made?

NONE.

We were approved based on the joint sponsor income and evidence of a genuine relationship. I think my reply to the RFE even mentioned that there was "no authorization document that could be supplied, so please continue our application without reference to this" (honesty at that point, knowing I'd screwed up, being the best policy).

Again, NO mention made of this.

May things change? Of course. This is not advice. This is my experience, that I can provide documentation of and the lack of issue it caused my partner and I, even as I got my welcome mail just today. Your milage, as they say, may vary, but BASED ON /CURRENT/ PROCEDURE AND LAW, your partner will not be negatively adjudicated against as the result of visa overstay or unauthorized employment."

[omeysgirl 0]

I had to physically stop my employer applying for a H-1B visa on my behalf - which would have made a mess of my visa application... "Oh, yes, it's a genuine relationship, I'm just covering all my bases!".

Their immigration attorneys had ZERO clue about the K-1 visa (understandable /to a degree/, but still). It was on their advice that I went about things a lot of the way I did, but having remembered how much I had to show them - links to USCIS.gov that directly contradicted what they said, etc, etc, I put very little stock in it.

Good to know!