The Sponsor File

Epsilon Data Management LLC

Filing address: Irving, TXworksites: TX, IL, CA, MA, GA (5 of 28 states)

  1. Change-of-employer denials
    0.0%
    USCIS · FY2021–FY2025 combined · n = 144 decided
  2. Median filed wage
    $140,100
    DOL LCA · FY2025 · n = 132 filings with a wage
  3. Historical PERM records
    115
    DOL PERM · FY2021–FY2026 (through Q3)
  4. WARN source records
    No matching CA records
    State WARN · CA only · through 2026-08-24
    Matching may be incomplete. Worksites in TX, IL, MA, GA, NY and 22 other states — not covered.

Historical filed wages are not verified amounts paid to workers. USCIS decisions do not estimate an individual petition’s outcome. Current sponsorship for a particular role is not verified here. One LCA is not one job.

Filing names grouped on this page may differ across sources. The record does not establish which legal entity would employ or petition for you.

Historical USCIS decisions by petition type

USCIS · FY2021–FY2025 combined

Not to be confused with LCA outcomes. An LCA is a Department of Labor filing that precedes the visa petition; nearly every employer's LCAs are certified at 99–100%, which tells you almost nothing about petition outcomes. The figures on this page come from USCIS petition decisions instead. The two are often reported interchangeably; they measure different things. Why these are two different datasets.

0.0%
n = 144petitions decided · FY2021–FY2025 combined

For change-of-employer petitions matched to this page, 0 were denied out of 144 decisions in FY2021–FY2025 combined. These historical decisions do not estimate the outcome of an individual petition. The year-by-year split is in the second table below. USCIS · FY2021–FY2025 combined

The table below splits petitions by filing type, over FY2021–FY2025 combined. Application categories describe the petitions in the source data; they do not determine which category or outcome applies to an individual.

All figures in this table are FY2021–FY2025 combined totals.
Filing typeApprovedDeniednDenied share
Change of employerPetitions classified as a change of employer14401440.0%
New employmentPetitions classified as new employment571582%
ContinuationPetitions classified as continuation of employment18531881.6%
AmendedA change at the same employer461472%
Change with same employerNew role, same employer13921411.4%
New concurrentA second, simultaneous H-1B000—

Where fewer than 20 petitions were decided we print the count instead of a percentage. A percentage drawn from a handful of cases reads like a probability, and it is not one. How the sample thresholds are set.

Year by year, change-of-employer petitions only. The headline above combines the FY2021–FY2025 rows of this table (marked in window); the other years are shown because the denial climate in earlier years was not the same one.

Change of employer, by fiscal year.
Fiscal yearApprovedDeniednDenied shareWindow
FY2026 (through Q3)1001010 decisions—
FY20251701717 decisionsin window
FY20241601616 decisionsin window
FY2023280280%in window
FY2022480480%in window
FY2021350350%in window
FY2020360360%—
FY20192022 decisions—

Source USCIS H-1B Employer Data Hub ·Coverage FY2009–FY2026 (through Q3) ·Loaded 2026-08-28 ·Files and method · Combined decision window FY2021–FY2025 combined

USCIS petition decisions are separate from DOL LCA and PERM statuses. These figures come from USCIS decisions on H-1B petitions (Form I-129). A denial reflects the outcome of one specific petition and depends on the role, the filing type, the year's adjudication climate, and the case's own facts. A high denial rate does not mean an employer will not sponsor you, and a low one does not guarantee your petition will be approved.
Why separate "change of employer" from "new employment"?

The source reports separate application categories. We keep them separate and use change-of-employer decisions for the headline, rather than blend different categories. These historical categories do not determine the process or outcome for a current role.

Why 5 years combined, and why these 5?

A single year of one employer's petitions is often a handful of cases, and a percentage drawn from a handful reads like a probability. Combining fiscal years raises the count — but only if the years belong to the same period. Across all employers in our data, the share of change-of-employer petitions denied ran at 9.54% in FY2018, 9.42% in FY2019 and 4.99% in FY2020, and has stayed between 1.28% and 1.99% in every one of the 5 years from FY2021 through FY2025. Averaging the earlier years together with FY2025 would not produce a steadier estimate; it would produce a number that describes no period at all. So the window stops where the earlier adjudication climate begins, and every figure drawn from it is labelled with the years it covers.

Historical filed wages for H-1B roles

DOL LCA · FY2021–FY2026 (through Q3)
$140,100
n = 132filings with a wage

FY2025 median, from 132 certified filings. DOL LCA · FY2025

Fiscal yearFiled wageWage sample (n)CertifiedWithdrawnDenied
FY2026 (through Q3)$139,740 · median of 73737320
FY2025$140,100 · median of 13213213300
FY2024$135,876 · median of 12712712710
FY2023$135,000 · median of 12112112130
FY2022$130,201 · median of 163163163381
FY2021$122,050 · median of 138138138110

Source U.S. Department of Labor — OFLC LCA disclosure files ·Coverage FY2021–FY2026 (through Q3) ·Loaded 2026-08-28 ·Files and method · Basis certified filings only; records whose wage unit is clearly mis-entered are excluded ·how wages are computed

Filed wages exclude bonuses and equity and do not confirm actual pay. DOL LCA Denied counts are not USCIS petition decisions.

What an LCA wage and status describe

These figures come from Labor Condition Applications (LCAs) the employer filed with the U.S. Department of Labor. They are the base wage the employer committed to pay — they exclude bonuses, equity, and other compensation, and they do not confirm what any individual was actually paid. A filing is not a hire.

A "denied" count near zero is normal here. The Department of Labor checks whether the form complies, not whether the person can get a visa. What decides that is the USCIS petition — the module above.

Filed wages by job title

DOL LCA · FY2021–FY2026 (through Q3)
Job titleFiled wageWage sample (n)
Software Engineer
across 4 seniority levels: $115,000 – $135,881
By seniority (6)

Senior: $129,000 · median of 59
Lead: $135,881 · median of 46
Level 2: $115,000 · median of 17
(unstated): $126,500 · median of 12
Staff: 8 filings — too few for a median
Principal: $171,500 · 1 filing

$130,000
median of 143
143
Data Analyst
By seniority (3)

Senior: $93,600 · median of 25
(unstated): 5 filings — too few for a median
Level 2: $87,550 · 1 filing

$92,000
median of 31
31
Data Engineer
By seniority (3)

Senior: 8 filings — too few for a median
(unstated): 2 filings — too few for a median
Lead: $144,000 · 1 filing

$130,688
median of 11
11
Devops Engineer
By seniority (1)

Senior: 6 filings — too few for a median


6 filings — too few for a median
6
Qa Engineer
By seniority (4)

Lead: 2 filings — too few for a median
Senior: 2 filings — too few for a median
Level 1: $82,326 · 1 filing
Level 2: $88,713 · 1 filing


6 filings — too few for a median
6
Data Scientist
By seniority (3)

(unstated): 3 filings — too few for a median
Junior: $90,000 · 1 filing
Senior: $166,963 · 1 filing


5 filings — too few for a median
5
Product Manager
By seniority (2)

(unstated): 3 filings — too few for a median
Associate: 2 filings — too few for a median


5 filings — too few for a median
5
Architect
By seniority (2)

(unstated): 3 filings — too few for a median
Senior: $188,625 · 1 filing


4 filings — too few for a median
4
Project Manager
By seniority (1)

Senior: 2 filings — too few for a median


2 filings — too few for a median
2

Titles come from the job title as filed, reduced to a known family — see how titles are grouped. Reported wages are from LCA filings, not verified amounts paid to workers. Each value is labeled as a single filing, a median with its sample size, or a withheld small sample; a seniority breakdown is shown where the filing stated one.

Source U.S. Department of Labor — OFLC LCA disclosure files ·Coverage FY2021–FY2026 (through Q3) ·Loaded 2026-08-28 ·Files and method · Basis certified filings with a stated wage; single-file values or medians above the sample threshold; not averages

Which wage tier this company files at

DOL LCA · FY2021–FY2026 (through Q3)

Every LCA names a prevailing wage — the government's reference rate for that job, in that place, at one of four experience tiers. Level I is entry-level; Level IV is the most senior. Two things matter here: which tier the employer files at, and how its filed wage compares with that reference. These are historical filings, not verified offers.

+16.2%
n = 754certified filings

Filed wages sit 16.2% above the prevailing wage for the same jobs and tiers. A figure near zero means the employer files at close to the government reference rate; a large one means it files well above.

Wage tier as filedFilings (n)Filed wagePrevailing wageDifference
Level I15$90,000 · median of 15$79,456 · median of 15+13.3%
Level II194$116,883 · median of 194$99,944 · median of 194+16.9%
Level III289$135,000 · median of 289$117,021 · median of 289+15.4%
Level IV205$151,008 · median of 205$128,315 · median of 205+17.7%
Not stated on the filing51$123,000 · median of 51$110,215 · median of 51+11.6%

Source U.S. Department of Labor — OFLC LCA disclosure files ·Coverage FY2021–FY2026 (through Q3) ·Loaded 2026-08-28 ·Files and method · Basis certified filings only; single-file values or medians above the sample threshold; not averages

“Not stated” and “marked not applicable” are two different things and we keep them apart. A blank tier means the employer left the field empty; “not applicable” means the employer said the tiered scale does not fit the role. Folding either one into the numbered tiers would turn “we do not know” into “we do”.

A tier is not a judgement about the employer. Filing at Level I for a genuinely entry-level role is correct. What the table shows is where the company placed the role on the scale and what it committed to pay against that reference — nothing more.

Historical PERM labor-certification records

DOL PERM · FY2021–FY2026 (through Q3)

PERM records do not establish current employer policy or an individual’s green-card outcome. Certified-expired is kept separate from Denied.

PERM records on file

115 permanent labor certification records are present across FY2021–FY2026 (through Q3), 15 of them in FY2026 (through Q3).

Fiscal yearCertifiedCertified-expiredDeniedWithdrawnTotal
FY2026 (through Q3)1500015
FY20250110011
FY20242030023
FY202313180132
FY2022650011
FY20211850023

Source U.S. Department of Labor — OFLC PERM disclosure files ·Coverage FY2021–FY2026 (through Q3) ·Loaded 2026-08-28 ·Files and method

How PERM statuses differ from green-card outcomes

Certified-expired is a status recorded in the PERM source files. We show it separately from certified, denied and withdrawn. These aggregate records do not establish whether a later immigration filing was made, why a record has this status, or whether an individual received a green card.

Matched WARN source records

State WARN notices
No matching WARN records found in CA (2018-11-15 to 2026-08-24). We have not matched records to this employer in the loaded sources. Entity matching may be incomplete; this does not establish that no notices were filed. But this employer also has worksites in TX, IL, MA, GA, NY, and we have not loaded those states — layoffs there would not show up here.

Source State WARN layoff notices ·Coverage CA · 2018-11-15 to 2026-08-24 ·Loaded 2026-08-28 ·Files and method

Questions to verify with the employer

Epsilon Data Management LLC
https://thesponsorfile.com/employer/epsilon-data-management-llc

These questions are prompted by the historical records and data gaps on this page. They are not conclusions about current policy or advice about an individual case.

  1. Filing identity

    Observed on this page: Epsilon Data Management LLC is the page display name. 4 filing-name variants are grouped here. Page scope: grouped filing names; source matching may differ. No group relationship is recorded here; independence is not verified. The future employing or petitioning legal entity is not verified.

    Ask the employer: Which legal entity would employ me and file any petition for this role? How does it relate to the filing names shown here?

    See records: Filing identity

  2. Pay and work location

    Observed on this page: FY2025: $140,100; n=132 filings with a wage; median of 132. Certified filings with valid annualized wages. Employer-wide filing samples can differ in role, level and location; this is not a like-for-like offer comparison. Filed wages are not verified pay or total compensation.

    Ask the employer: What base pay, job title, level and work location are specified for this role, and how do they relate to the historical filings shown here?

    See records: Pay and work location

  3. Current petition policy

    Observed on this page: FY2021–FY2025 combined: 144 approved / 0 denied matched change-of-employer decisions; n=144.

    Ask the employer: Does the employer currently support the petition type required for this role, and who can explain the process and timing? These historical counts do not establish current policy.

    See records: Current petition policy

    • USCIS H-1B Employer Data Hub · FY2009–FY2026 (through Q3) · Loaded 2026-08-28 — https://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-and-studies/h-1b-employer-data-hub
  4. Current permanent-residence policy

    Observed on this page: 115 matched PERM records across FY2021–FY2026 (through Q3). n=115 source records across all covered years. This is not a count of green cards issued.

    Ask the employer: What is the employer’s current policy for starting an employment-based permanent-residence process for this role, and which entity would handle it? Historical PERM records do not confirm a commitment for this role.

    See records: Current permanent-residence policy

  5. Current team and worksite changes

    Observed on this page: No matching WARN records found in CA; CA · 2018-11-15 to 2026-08-24. We have not matched records to this employer in the loaded sources. Loaded states: CA. Worksite states not loaded: TX, IL, MA, GA, NY, MI, OH, VA, CO, NC, NJ, TN, MN, PA, FL, MO, WA, CT, AR, UT, AZ, IA, KS, KY, MS, NV, OR. Source observations may include different locations or revisions, not independent events or unique people. Entity matching may be incomplete; this does not establish that no notices were filed or no changes occurred.

    Ask the employer: Can you clarify any announced staffing or worksite changes relevant to this role? This page’s WARN coverage cannot establish that no changes occurred.

    See records: Current team and worksite changes

    • State WARN layoff notices · CA · 2018-11-15 to 2026-08-24 · Loaded 2026-08-28 — https://edd.ca.gov/en/jobs_and_training/layoff_services_warn/

Current sponsorship, pay, hiring plans and policy for a specific role remain unverified. Loaded dates identify our data version, not a human review date. For advice on an individual immigration case, consult a qualified professional.

This page combines 4 filing names

how we grouped them

This page groups the filing names listed below. Grouping may differ across sources and does not establish which legal entity would employ or petition for you.

Show the filing names behind this page
Name as filedFEIN (last 4)Filings
Epsilon Data Management LLC9783803
Epsilon Data Management, LLC—8

Showing the 2 most common of 4 filing names.

Different tax IDs in this list are normal — large companies file through several legal entities. We never group by tax ID alone: placeholder and mistyped IDs are common enough that doing so would merge unrelated companies. Grouping here comes from the filing names themselves, plus recorded human judgement where two entities are publicly one company.

Where else Epsilon Data Management LLC appears on this site

by filing volume

Places. It is among the top filers in Irving, TX, Wakefield, MA, West Chicago, IL, Westminster, CO, Cohoes, NY, Vernon, CT, Melrose, MA and Boonton, NJ. Filings are counted by worksite, not by where the company is headquartered.

These are the city and role pages on which this employer ranks among the largest filers — not a complete list of everywhere it files.

Browse all cities and job titles, or read how filings are grouped.

Other employers in TX with too few filings for their own page

not ranked

These employers filed LCAs but have fewer than 10 certified records, which is not enough to build a page on. They are listed so that "not shown" never gets read as "does not sponsor".

3A Infotech LLC (9) · Aaur Consultancy LLC (9) · ABS Digital Solutions LLC (9) · AccentCare, Inc. (9) · Adef Company (9) · Aesthetic Record LLC (9) · Afton Technologies LLC (9) · AG Fintax (9)

Showing the 8 with the most filings — 8+ employers in TX are below the threshold. This list is truncated, not complete.