H-1B Sponsors for Lawyers
67 employers filed 5,954 H-1B Labor Condition Applications for Lawyers across the US between FY2010 and FY2026. The 50 largest are ranked below, with DOL certification outcomes and a sponsor-health signal.
- Employers
- 67top 50 listed
- Filings
- 5,95425% of all 23,434 for this role
- Certified
- 84.9%across those listed
- Median wage
- $210,000across the sponsors listed
How this total is counted: filings from employers with at least 25 for this occupation, a resolved employer and a recorded worksite state. That is 5,954 of the 23,434 total shown on the Lawyers occupation page (25%); the remainder is the long tail of employers below the publishing threshold.
How to read this
- Does an H-1B filing mean a visa was granted?
- No. A Labor Condition Application is the wage-and-worksite filing an employer makes before petitioning. Many certified LCAs never become petitions, and an LCA is not a visa. What an LCA is.
- Is a certified filing the same as USCIS approval?
- No. Certification is a Department of Labor outcome. The I-129 petition is decided separately by USCIS and is not in this dataset. How certification rate works.
- Does a withdrawn filing count against a sponsor?
- No. A withdrawal usually means the role was filled or dropped, so it is not a compliance signal and is not counted against a sponsor in the sponsor-health score. How sponsor health is calculated.
- Is the wage shown what an employee takes home?
- No. Offered and prevailing wages are the figures on the filing, before tax, bonus or equity, and they describe the role rather than an individual paycheck. How the prevailing wage works.
- Is the most recent fiscal year complete?
- Not necessarily. The Department of Labor releases disclosure data quarterly, so counts for the latest fiscal years can still rise in a later release.
- Why are some occupations or states missing?
- Combinations backed by fewer than 25 filings, or fewer than 3 distinct employers, are not published at all. Small cells are omitted entirely rather than shown with unreliable numbers.
Top 50 sponsors, ranked
The 50 highest-volume of 67 employers that filed for this role here. Filter and sort instantly — everything below is already on the page, so nothing reloads. Your view is shareable: the URL updates as you filter.
Showing 50 of 50 sponsors · all filings FY2010–FY2026.
| # | Wage levels | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP | 398 | 94.7% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 1%, Level II: 65%, Level III: 28%, Level IV: 6% | |
| 2 | Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP | 356 | 98.3% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 1%, Level II: 42%, Level III: 47%, Level IV: 11% | |
| 3 | White & Case LLP | 352 | 70.7% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 24%, Level II: 17%, Level III: 19%, Level IV: 40% | |
| 4 | PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLPlast filed FY2014 | 292 | 99.0% | $55,557 | — | |
| 5 | Shearman & Sterling LLPlast filed FY2019 | 285 | 58.2% | $180,000 | — | |
| 6 | Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP | 271 | 71.2% | $210,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 36%, Level II: 15%, Level III: 36%, Level IV: 12% | |
| 7 | Latham & Watkins LLP | 268 | 99.3% | $260,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 18%, Level II: 70%, Level III: 11%, Level IV: 1% | |
| 8 | Sidley Austin (US) LLP | 249 | 86.7% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 37%, Level II: 19%, Level III: 24%, Level IV: 20% | |
| 9 | Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, LLP | 210 | 92.4% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 16%, Level II: 80%, Level III: 1%, Level IV: 3% | |
| 10 | Morrison & Foerster LLP | 146 | 65.1% | $160,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 98%, Level IV: 2% | |
| 11 | Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP | 144 | 68.8% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 29%, Level II: 13%, Level III: 58% | |
| 12 | Kirkland & Ellis LLP | 126 | 96.8% | $297,500 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 16%, Level II: 17%, Level III: 18%, Level IV: 49% | |
| 13 | DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON LLP | 121 | 94.2% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 42%, Level III: 51%, Level IV: 7% | |
| 14 | Mayer Brown LLP | 107 | 91.6% | $184,375 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 11%, Level II: 20%, Level III: 20%, Level IV: 49% | |
| 15 | CLEARY GOTTLIEB STEEN & HAMILTON LLP | 103 | 94.2% | $160,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 83%, Level II: 17% | |
| 16 | Baker & McKenzie LLP | 101 | 86.1% | $185,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 33%, Level III: 25%, Level IV: 42% | |
| 17 | Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP | 100 | 80.0% | $200,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 13%, Level II: 30%, Level III: 54%, Level IV: 4% | |
| 18 | FRIED, FRANK, HARRIS, SHRIVER & JACOBSON LLP | 100 | 77.0% | $245,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 11%, Level II: 19%, Level III: 50%, Level IV: 19% | |
| 19 | Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP | 94 | 84.0% | $310,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 48%, Level III: 40%, Level IV: 13% | |
| 20 | O'Melveny & Myers LLP | 92 | 53.3% | $230,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 5%, Level III: 15%, Level IV: 80% | |
| 21 | Covington & Burling LLP | 84 | 84.5% | $210,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 17%, Level II: 38%, Level III: 38%, Level IV: 7% | |
| 22 | AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC (VA) | 82 | 100.0% | $173,400 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 15%, Level II: 52%, Level III: 31%, Level IV: 3% | |
| 23 | Ropes & Gray LLP | 77 | 87.0% | $190,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 24%, Level III: 57%, Level IV: 19% | |
| 24 | Linklaters LLP | 74 | 87.8% | $260,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 6%, Level II: 6%, Level III: 75%, Level IV: 13% | |
| 25 | AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC (WA)last filed FY2023 | 70 | 97.1% | $151,950 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 27%, Level II: 41%, Level III: 32% | |
| 26 | CURTIS MALLET PREVOST COLT & MOSLE LLP | 70 | 87.1% | $160,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 83%, Level II: 17% | |
| 27 | Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan | 70 | 88.6% | $217,500 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 82%, Level II: 9%, Level IV: 9% | |
| 28 | Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP | 65 | 87.7% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 15%, Level II: 33%, Level III: 46%, Level IV: 5% | |
| 29 | Vinson & Elkins L.L.P. | 61 | 82.0% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 67%, Level II: 20%, Level III: 13% | |
| 30 | Jones Day | 58 | 69.0% | $192,795 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 15%, Level III: 30%, Level IV: 55% | |
| 31 | Paul Hastings LLP | 55 | 76.4% | $170,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 50%, Level II: 14%, Level III: 7%, Level IV: 29% | |
| 32 | King & Spalding LLP | 54 | 85.2% | $170,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 8%, Level II: 42%, Level III: 25%, Level IV: 25% | |
| 33 | SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP | 53 | 92.5% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 6%, Level II: 94% | |
| 34 | DLA Piper LLP (US) | 51 | 84.3% | $180,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 15%, Level II: 62%, Level III: 8%, Level IV: 15% | |
| 35 | K&L Gates LLP | 50 | 88.0% | $158,500 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 33%, Level IV: 67% | |
| 36 | Allen Overy Shearman Sterling US LLP | 49 | 81.6% | $260,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 18%, Level II: 22%, Level III: 55%, Level IV: 4% | |
| 37 | Hogan Lovells US LLP | 48 | 83.3% | $210,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 56%, Level III: 25%, Level IV: 19% | |
| 38 | Clifford Chance US LLP | 43 | 97.7% | $185,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 28%, Level III: 50%, Level IV: 22% | |
| 39 | Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz | 43 | 90.7% | $215,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 42%, Level II: 25%, Level III: 33% | |
| 40 | Winston & Strawn LLP | 43 | 83.7% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 43%, Level III: 57% | |
| 41 | Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP | 40 | 82.5% | $265,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 7%, Level II: 53%, Level III: 27%, Level IV: 13% | |
| 42 | Allen & Overy LLP | 40 | 80.0% | $210,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 80%, Level III: 20% | |
| 43 | Amazon Retail LLClast filed FY2017 | 40 | 97.5% | $152,000 | — | |
| 44 | Goodwin Procter LLP | 39 | 92.3% | $260,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 54%, Level III: 27%, Level IV: 19% | |
| 45 | Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP | 37 | 81.1% | $150,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 100% | |
| 46 | Perkins Coie LLP | 37 | 78.4% | $150,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level III: 100% | |
| 47 | Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP | 34 | 79.4% | $225,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 14%, Level II: 36%, Level III: 27%, Level IV: 23% | |
| 48 | Microsoft Corporation | 33 | 90.9% | $155,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level IV: 100% | |
| 49 | Apple Inc. | 32 | 87.5% | $184,883 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level II: 100% | |
| 50 | REED SMITH LLP | 31 | 77.4% | $145,000 | Prevailing-wage level mix — Level I: 33%, Level II: 17%, Level IV: 50% |
- Filings
- 398
- Certified
- 94.7%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 356
- Certified
- 98.3%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 352
- Certified
- 70.7%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 292
- Certified
- 99.0%
- Median wage
- $55,557
- Filings
- 285
- Certified
- 58.2%
- Median wage
- $180,000
- Filings
- 271
- Certified
- 71.2%
- Median wage
- $210,000
- Filings
- 268
- Certified
- 99.3%
- Median wage
- $260,000
- Filings
- 249
- Certified
- 86.7%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 210
- Certified
- 92.4%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 146
- Certified
- 65.1%
- Median wage
- $160,000
- Filings
- 144
- Certified
- 68.8%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 126
- Certified
- 96.8%
- Median wage
- $297,500
- Filings
- 121
- Certified
- 94.2%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 107
- Certified
- 91.6%
- Median wage
- $184,375
- Filings
- 103
- Certified
- 94.2%
- Median wage
- $160,000
- Filings
- 101
- Certified
- 86.1%
- Median wage
- $185,000
- Filings
- 100
- Certified
- 80.0%
- Median wage
- $200,000
- Filings
- 100
- Certified
- 77.0%
- Median wage
- $245,000
- Filings
- 94
- Certified
- 84.0%
- Median wage
- $310,000
- Filings
- 92
- Certified
- 53.3%
- Median wage
- $230,000
- Filings
- 84
- Certified
- 84.5%
- Median wage
- $210,000
- Filings
- 82
- Certified
- 100.0%
- Median wage
- $173,400
- Filings
- 77
- Certified
- 87.0%
- Median wage
- $190,000
- Filings
- 74
- Certified
- 87.8%
- Median wage
- $260,000
- Filings
- 70
- Certified
- 97.1%
- Median wage
- $151,950
- Filings
- 70
- Certified
- 87.1%
- Median wage
- $160,000
- Filings
- 70
- Certified
- 88.6%
- Median wage
- $217,500
- Filings
- 65
- Certified
- 87.7%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 61
- Certified
- 82.0%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 58
- Certified
- 69.0%
- Median wage
- $192,795
- Filings
- 55
- Certified
- 76.4%
- Median wage
- $170,000
- Filings
- 54
- Certified
- 85.2%
- Median wage
- $170,000
- Filings
- 53
- Certified
- 92.5%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 51
- Certified
- 84.3%
- Median wage
- $180,000
- Filings
- 50
- Certified
- 88.0%
- Median wage
- $158,500
- Filings
- 49
- Certified
- 81.6%
- Median wage
- $260,000
- Filings
- 48
- Certified
- 83.3%
- Median wage
- $210,000
- Filings
- 43
- Certified
- 97.7%
- Median wage
- $185,000
- Filings
- 43
- Certified
- 90.7%
- Median wage
- $215,000
- Filings
- 43
- Certified
- 83.7%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 40
- Certified
- 82.5%
- Median wage
- $265,000
- Filings
- 40
- Certified
- 80.0%
- Median wage
- $210,000
- Filings
- 40
- Certified
- 97.5%
- Median wage
- $152,000
- Filings
- 39
- Certified
- 92.3%
- Median wage
- $260,000
- Filings
- 37
- Certified
- 81.1%
- Median wage
- $150,000
- Filings
- 37
- Certified
- 78.4%
- Median wage
- $150,000
- Filings
- 34
- Certified
- 79.4%
- Median wage
- $225,000
- Filings
- 33
- Certified
- 90.9%
- Median wage
- $155,000
- Filings
- 32
- Certified
- 87.5%
- Median wage
- $184,883
- Filings
- 31
- Certified
- 77.4%
- Median wage
- $145,000
How the sponsor-health signal is calculated
The badge blends each sponsor’s DOL certification rate (weighted toward the last five fiscal years), its denial rate, and its recent filing volume. Withdrawn filings are not counted against a sponsor, because a withdrawal usually means the role was filled or dropped. Sponsors with too few or too old filings show “Limited data” rather than a score. It reflects DOL paperwork outcomes only — not USCIS approval, pay quality, or an endorsement. Full methodology.
Where else Lawyers is sponsored
Other states with enough Lawyers filings to publish a sponsor breakdown.