0
Case Stories
⏳ EB-3 ROW AOS Interview - UK (ROW) PD Unknown
E
· 1 views
⏳ **Case Status: Pending**
---
A UK national on an L-1b visa with ~13 years total experience in Information Security attended an AOS interview at Sacramento Field Office. The interview focused heavily on I-485 accuracy and a USCIS memo-derived questionnaire around the choice of AOS over consular processing. No on-the-spot decision was issued.
Category: EB-3 ROW, Adjustment of Status based on a valid L-1b visa. Industry: Information Security. No dependents. Applicant entered the US in 2022, was fully onsite until 2024, then transitioned to partial remote (~500 miles from office, quarterly in-person). A minor foreign misdemeanor (~12 years old) was disclosed on both the original L-1 petition and extension, and is believed to be the trigger for the interview. Attorney was present. Interview covered two main areas: (1) verification of I-485 answers, and (2) questions from a USCIS memo specifically probing the rationale for choosing AOS over consular processing — why the job cannot be performed from the UK during CP wait, whether the employer required AOS, and whether immigrant intent existed at time of L-1b entry. Applicant's responses centered on operational necessity: timezone constraints, US-based mentoring responsibilities, and sole ownership of complex technical initiatives. The officer indicated Sacramento FO cannot adjudicate the case locally, implying a referral or additional review is required. No conviction-specific questions were asked despite the disclosed misdemeanor.
---
**[📎 View Original Post](https://www.reddit.com/r/USCIS/comments/1tpmssm/eb3_aos_row_interview_experience_today_at/)**
*Source: Reddit EB-3 search*
---
*This post was automatically curated from online sources to share real case experiences with the community.*
Sacramento FO AOS interviews in 2025-2026 appear to follow a standardized USCIS memo questionnaire focused on L-1b holders choosing AOS over consular processing — this is not case-specific scrutiny but a policy-level review pattern. Cases with disclosed foreign misdemeanors are not automatically disqualifying if consistently reported across prior petitions, but they reliably trigger interviews even for employment-based applicants without dependents. Sacramento FO has indicated it cannot locally adjudicate certain AOS cases, which suggests these cases are being escalated to a centralized review body or headquarters — applicants should expect extended post-interview timelines before receiving a written decision. Similar L-1b to EB-3 ROW AOS cases involving remote work arrangements should be prepared to clearly articulate why US physical presence is operationally required, as this is a documented line of questioning at this stage.