Yes — USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0199, issued May 21, 2026, applies to employment-based adjustment of status filings. The memorandum governs how adjudicators exercise discretion on Form I-485 under INA section 245, regardless of whether the underlying petition is EB-1, EB-2, EB-3, family-based, or another eligible category. It did not amend the substantive criteria for Form I-140 or for labor certification.

Does PM-602-0199 Apply to EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 Filings?

Yes. PM-602-0199 is a Form I-485 adjudication memorandum, and Form I-485 is the vehicle for adjustment in every employment-based preference category. EB-1 priority workers, EB-2 advanced-degree professionals, EB-3 skilled workers and professionals all file I-485 once a visa number is available. The discretionary framework set out in the memorandum reaches each of those filings.

The practical effect is that an approved I-140 no longer functions as an effectively automatic predicate to I-485 approval. Adjudicators must now articulate the discretionary balance — weighing positive equities against any adverse factors — on the I-485 record. The threshold legal eligibility under INA section 245 has not changed; what has changed is the documentation expected to support a favorable exercise of discretion.

What Did Not Change for Employment-Based Petitions?

A great deal. Form I-140 adjudication standards, the PERM labor certification process, prevailing wage determinations, and the Department of State visa bulletin priority date system all continue under existing rules. The memorandum did not alter EB preference categories, per-country limits, or the National Interest Waiver standard under Matter of Dhanasar.

Employers continue to file Form I-140 under the same evidentiary standards. Beneficiaries continue to wait for priority dates to become current. The downstream I-485 step is where PM-602-0199 changes adjudicator behavior. For most well-documented employment-based filings, the existing case file already contains many of the equities the memorandum highlights — long employment history, tax records, and lawful status maintenance.

What Did Change at the Form I-485 Step?

The discretionary framing changed. Under PM-602-0199, adjudicators apply a totality-of-the-circumstances analysis to each Form I-485, weighing positive equities such as lawful presence, tax compliance, and community contributions against any adverse factors in the record. This analytical framework was always part of INA section 245(a), which makes adjustment discretionary, but the memorandum directs adjudicators to document the balance more explicitly.

For employment-based applicants, this means the I-485 supporting package benefits from a more developed equities record than was customary before May 2026. Pay stubs, IRS transcripts, evidence of continuous lawful status under H-1B, L-1, O-1, or another nonimmigrant classification, and documentation of any U.S.-citizen family members all become more salient. The memorandum also clarifies that discretionary review does not override eligibility — an applicant who fails to meet section 245 eligibility is not denied as a matter of discretion; they are denied for ineligibility. Discretion is the second step, applied to eligible filings. See the pending-I-485 explainer for how this affects cases already on file.

How Does the Dual-Intent Framework Interact With PM-602-0199?

Dual intent is preserved. The doctrine that permits H-1B and L-1 nonimmigrants to maintain valid status while simultaneously pursuing lawful permanent residence was not touched by PM-602-0199. H-1B holders can still file Form I-485 without that filing itself being treated as a violation of nonimmigrant status. The memorandum operates downstream of that question.

What the memorandum changes is the discretionary analysis the adjudicator performs on the I-485 once it is filed. An H-1B holder who has maintained status, paid federal taxes, and worked continuously for a U.S. employer typically has a strong equities record to point to. The memorandum encourages adjudicators to credit that record explicitly. Concerns sometimes raised in practitioner commentary — that an H-1B applicant's prior intent to depart could be revisited — are not borne out by the memorandum's text, which preserves dual intent as a settled doctrine. For a deeper treatment of how the two interact, see the H-1B dual-intent explainer.

What Equities Matter Most for Employment-Based Applicants?

Four categories surfaced consistently in May 2026 practitioner analysis. First, long-term lawful presence in the United States — years of maintained H-1B, L-1, O-1, or F-1 status documented with I-94 records and prior approval notices. Second, consistent federal tax compliance — IRS Form 1040 transcripts, W-2 records, and any state tax filings.

Third, employment in critical sectors. The memorandum does not enumerate favored industries, but practitioner commentary identified STEM occupations, healthcare roles (physicians, nurses, allied health), and advanced manufacturing as categories where USCIS adjudicators have historically weighted contributions favorably. Documentation might include employer letters describing the role's contribution, evidence of specialized credentials, and any National Interest Waiver or extraordinary-ability findings already in the file.

Fourth, U.S.-citizen immediate family ties where applicable. Many employment-based applicants are married to U.S. citizens or have U.S.-citizen children; those ties are independently relevant equities under the framework. A licensed immigration attorney can help identify which equities apply to a specific case and how to document them. The unusual-outstanding-equities explainer walks through the higher equity standard that can apply when adverse factors exist in the record.

What Should Employment-Based Applicants Do Now?

Three steps are reasonable for most employment-based applicants. First, gather documentation of lawful status, tax compliance, and employment history. Second, consult a licensed immigration attorney about how the discretionary framework applies to the specific case — particularly if there are any past status gaps, prior denials, or adverse factors. Third, ensure the I-485 supporting package reflects the equities record.

Form I-140 holders whose priority dates are not yet current have time to assemble the equities package before filing. Those with current priority dates and pending I-485s should review the file with counsel to decide whether to supplement. For an overview of whether filing today still makes sense given the new framework, see the can-I-still-file explainer. The intake form and the chatbot can help organize the relevant information before that attorney consultation.

Updated May 24, 2026.