On August 5, USCIS will begin rejecting Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, petitions that do not include the petitioner’s or applicant’s name and primary U.S. office address in Part 1 of Form I-129.

USCIS currently rejects Form I-129 for several reasons. These include, but are not limited to, lack of signature, incorrect fees, or unauthorized third party signing on behalf of the petitioner. 

DHS regulations require every form to be submitted in accordance with the form instructions, and allow USCIS to reject any benefit request that is not filed in compliance with the regulations governing the specific benefit request. See 8 CFR 103.2(a)(1) and 8 CFR 103.2(a)(7)(ii)(C).

The petitioner’s or applicant’s primary U.S. office address in Part 1 of Form I-129 must not be the address of the petitioner’s or applicant’s outside counsel or clients. Failure to include the petitioner’s or applicant’s name or providing the address of the petitioner’s or applicant’s outside counsel or clients in Part 1 creates unnecessary delays in the adjudication of Form I-129 and may result in its rejection.

The Instructions for Form I-129 state, in relevant part:

Petitioner Information

Complete the “Legal Name of Petitioner” field (if the petitioner is an individual person or a company or organization). For mailing address, list the address of the petitioner’s primary office within the United States. 

In many instances, the petitioner’s or applicant’s primary U.S. office address will determine the filing jurisdiction. Information about where to file Form I-129 is available on the Direct Filing Addresses for Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker page.

Form I-129 petitions that USCIS rejects due to missing information can generally be refiled with the required information and fee. However, there are instances when a refiled petition or application would be rejected, such as when a statutory cap-subject petition is resubmitted after USCIS has received a sufficient number of petitions projected as needed to reach the congressionally mandated numerical limit.