EB1-OR RFE at NSC

Y

YOR

Registered Users (C)
Hi, guys:

I have the worst luck at NSC.

I am holding a reserach scientist position, not tenured or tenure-track, at University. Offer letter was signed by department chair, confirmed by HR officer, submitted with university's guideline on Immigration. NSC admitted the letter "was crafted for Service's permanent purpose", but stated that University's website shows such position (Regular, unclassified) is "work at will" position. They asked more objective documentary evidence, which I do not have. The school told me they don't understand and don't know what to do, because our state is work at will state.

My offer letter contained every term, and furbished by a lawyer.

What shall I do to respond RFE?

Thanks.
 
If HR office attest that ur position is permanent then "objective documentary evidence" should be aimed to prove that whatever is posted on net was outdated and what they say is current law!!!
 
Dude,

For your case, the exact wording in the RFE and your offer letter is the crucial for people here to figure out what really the issue is. You have to paste that here (of course remove any identity info).

I don't what kind of job, except for those assigned to prisoners, is not "at will" to some extense.
 
The RFE words

Here is the RFE:I cannot beleive this officer check our university HR policy online. He is one of several guys at NSC doing this on our University.

The record doesn't sufficiently demonstrate that the beneficiary has been offered a permanent position as considered by the Service. You submitted a job offer letter which appears to have been crafted specificially for the Service, as it discusses the Service definition of permanent. However, information publicly available on the University's website indicates that the position is not permanent as considered by the Service.

...According to the Univ's classification system, the position is unclassified. The policy's indicated that unclassified position are considered to be regular appointments. The policy further stated "Regular, unclassified appointment are at well".....

Therefore you must submit clear documentary that the beneficiary has been offered a tenured, tenure-track or permanent research position by petition entity.....
 
Please notice these words "appears to have been crafted specifically". Clearly the officer didn't admit your offer letter meets their requirement. Even worse, he/she suspect the offer letter is not a real one - he/she thought you might have done something undertable with your Univ or department.

On object evidence I can think of is your salary and benifits. I think if you can document your salary and benifits are essentially the same as an Aiss Prof., and come to you from the same Univ budget/plan, then you are in a good position to argue.

"Work at will" is not an issue, I believe. "Permenant" means that you are expected to hold the position as long as your performance is satisfactory.

YOR said:
Here is the RFE:I cannot beleive this officer check our university HR policy online. He is one of several guys at NSC doing this on our University.

The record doesn't sufficiently demonstrate that the beneficiary has been offered a permanent position as considered by the Service. You submitted a job offer letter which appears to have been crafted specificially for the Service, as it discusses the Service definition of permanent. However, information publicly available on the University's website indicates that the position is not permanent as considered by the Service.

...According to the Univ's classification system, the position is unclassified. The policy's indicated that unclassified position are considered to be regular appointments. The policy further stated "Regular, unclassified appointment are at well".....

Therefore you must submit clear documentary that the beneficiary has been offered a tenured, tenure-track or permanent research position by petition entity.....
Click to expand...
 
Actually, my salary and benefit is so so, average university level. So, it is not strong, or can be used as objsct evidence.

I noticed the law and regulation require offer letter and its content only. AAO cannot influence the policy, made by Congree, as well as by University. It seems that this specific officer has gone too far beyond the scope. Unfortunatley, AAO seems to be happy to see the Service doing this way. I am one of the several bad luck guys around me. Some with lower rank title and less pay got approved recently. So it is totally unreasonable and officer dependend.

As for under-table issue, we didn't have. We prepared it according to the law and University immigration policy. The Univ. published a guideline in 2004 in helping persons like me. This guideline has been submitted already. I believe that he saw it. However, he just wants to torture me on this issue. I think eb1doc's idea mightbe helpful. But it requres authority from a higher level University officer doing that.

Form next month, all I-140 cases will go to NSC. Good luck everyone!
 
If your salary is in average level, then it is a strong evidence that your position *is* permenant.

Post-doc position is much lower, usually. And their salaries usually come from grant, not University budget.

I don't think you did any undertable stuff. But the problem is that the officer might think. Now you have to use evidence to ask him/her to f*k off!





YOR said:
Actually, my salary and benefit is so so, average university level. So, it is not strong, or can be used as objsct evidence.

I noticed the law and regulation require offer letter and its content only. AAO cannot influence the policy, made by Congree, as well as by University. It seems that this specific officer has gone too far beyond the scope. Unfortunatley, AAO seems to be happy to see the Service doing this way. I am one of the several bad luck guys around me. Some with lower rank title and less pay got approved recently. So it is totally unreasonable and officer dependend.

As for under-table issue, we didn't have. We prepared it according to the law and University immigration policy. The Univ. published a guideline in 2004 in helping persons like me. This guideline has been submitted already. I believe that he saw it. However, he just wants to torture me on this issue. I think eb1doc's idea mightbe helpful. But it requres authority from a higher level University officer doing that.

Form next month, all I-140 cases will go to NSC. Good luck everyone!
Click to expand...
 
Really all cases will be shipped after 4/1? I thought that most old cases will stay till adjudicated.

Where did you get the news that all the cases will be shipped?
 
You can all show the approved Grant proposals copy to show that your position is permanent for these periods and after that the proposal extend for another few years and hence the position is permanent.
 
But the grant money is soft money.It's a weak point in OR application. It can be easily used as an excuse for denial. Isn't it?
 
YOR said:
But the grant money is soft money.It's a weak point in OR application. It can be easily used as an excuse for denial. Isn't it?
Click to expand...

Well u are not showing that you are paid from grant
u have to shwo that only faculty with permanent position get that grant!!
 
Hi, eb1doc:

I do have a grant (as the P.I.), which is pending. I have also joined several other grants (as Co-PI or satff). I don't think it is helpful.
 
well !In that case, if you can provide a documentry evidence that these grants are not even considered if they are not coming from permanent faculties....that will great help!
 
Good points! I just remebered that only faculty member, as required by University and the grant source, was allowed to apply. My chair did prove my eligibility to Research institute. I will try to get it.

Besides, I want to present university's benefit policy on me and faculty. (No difference on all itmes) to prove. Is that OK?
 
I suggest you guys use PM to discuss details.

If that officer can use your University's web to get information, then it is certainly possible to get information here - from your own posts!

eb1doc certainly has very good points, but if the officer knows about how you arrange all this, then...

I am not saying he/she will certainly raise a red flag, but the safer way is certainly not discussing details here...

:rolleyes:
 
YOR said:
Hi, guys:

I have the worst luck at NSC.

I am holding a reserach scientist position, not tenured or tenure-track, at University. Offer letter was signed by department chair, confirmed by HR officer, submitted with university's guideline on Immigration. NSC admitted the letter "was crafted for Service's permanent purpose", but stated that University's website shows such position (Regular, unclassified) is "work at will" position. They asked more objective documentary evidence, which I do not have. The school told me they don't understand and don't know what to do, because our state is work at will state.

My offer letter contained every term, and furbished by a lawyer.

What shall I do to respond RFE?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
Sorry to hear that..I think you will be fine.
I have had similar problem with my I140 from TSC. go through my posting at the following thread and see if it helps.
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=180294&page=2
I think you need to get multiple letters from your University administration and advisor and college dean (if possible).
If you can furnish documents and letters stating that the program in which you are working has a history of funding that will partially fulfill the requirement. In addition, a letter from your research dean and another from your advisor on the same lines would help. you can also include one more letter from your HR about your position in relation to University rules.
When I responded basically I did following things.
1. A letter from advisor about his current and past funding and future or pending proposals
2. A letter from research dean about the goals of program and how important my role in that program
3. A letter from the chairman of the department ..this was prepared in response to RFE regarding permanency of the position.
4. proof of funding from NIH and other agencies (award letters, CRISP database information etc)
I hope it helps to prepare your RFE.
Good luck,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top