H1B Visa Lawyer Blog

The Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA) recently overturned the decision of a Certifying Officer (CO) to deny labor certification for the position of “Computer Software Engineer.”

The CO denied the application stating that the Labor application is incomplete and inconsistent with the submitted information from the employer and the applicant. On the Labor application, the Employer’s physical address is listed as Martinsburg, West Virginia but their phone number’s area code is Arlington, Virginia. The applicant’s home address is listed in Martinsburg, West Virginia but his phone number’s area code -571 is representative of Leesburg, Virginia. As additional proof, the CO declared the Employer had signed in Section N, of the LCA, that the information submitted was “true and accurate to the best of its knowledge.”

Perm regulations require an employer seeking to apply for permanent labor to file an ETA Form 9089.20 C.F.R. & 656.17(a). These regulations state that any incomplete applications will be denied.

The Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA) recently affirmed the decision of a Certifying Officer (CO) to deny labor certification for the position of “R & D Manager/Chemist.”

After receiving and reviewing an Employer’s Application for Permanent Labor Certification, the CO issued an Audit notification. The Employer responded with details of its recruitment efforts as well as summary chart. After reviewing the Audit materials, the CO denied certification of the application. The Employer provided recruitment efforts that did not match the one as listed on the Employer’s ETA Form 9089. In its ETA Form, the Employer indicated it advertised the job opening through its “employee referral program, a job search website and its own website.” In the Audit materials, the Employer failed to provide any documentation of the referral program. It included an advertisement with ecampusrecruiter.com sponsored by the University of Pittsburgh, which was not listed on ETA Form 9089. Since the Employer failed to provide any evidence of the employer referral program, the CO had no choice but to deny certification of the labor application.

The Employer sent a reconsideration request to the CO. The Employer argued that it had made a clerical mistake by listing the referral program on its ETA Form. In its request for reconsideration, it also submitted a corrected ETA Form 9089. The CO re-affirmed its denial and forwarded the case to the BALCA for review.