Finally replied to RFE...

T

trojanblue

Registered Users (C)
Hello All,

It's been a while since I posted anything on this group. Finally finished replying to my RFE for my NIW case (NSC). I got a general RFE of only 1.5 pages long. Half of my first page was detailing my accomplishments and Service agreed that I met the criteria for the first two prongs. Next 5 paragraphs were general cut 'n paste request for the third prong. Amazing, they did'nt rip my original application apart where I had sent only my degree certificates, my award and copy of my patents!!! No letters or anything of that sort!!!

Anyways, for those who don't know my background:

Ph.D from one of the top schools.
I work in private sector in product development and Applications Research.
~15 papers (mainly conf & poster presentations).
6 patents (2 already awarded, 2 submitted and 2 in progress). I'll come to this point later.
1 Major Conference award in US. Nice letter from Pres of conference who is a big shot working in NIST, US Dept of Commerce.
Invited to conduct educational workshop clinic. I have results of evaluation of the clinic (ave I scored: 3.9/4.0)
8 Letters: 1 from Pres of company, 1 from VP, 1 from Dir. R&D., 1 from Thesis advisor, 2 from people who had graduated from my school (seniors) but had never collaborated with me and 2 more I knew who have never worked with me on any project. Easy enough for me to show since we work in different industries.

About my patents: Of the 2 patents that have been awarded, one is International patent. These two patents cover a process I developed for my ex-employer who uses this in their products. I got a few letters to testify to this and pulled out the pages from my ex-employers website which claims why their products are superior and linked that to my patents.

The other 4 patents: My current Pres, VP and Dir. all wrote that if it were not for me, these patents would not have been possible! They even volunteered to put this info even though I had not even requested it!! Pres says that I led the development effort and because of me the product was introduced into the market so quickly and noted in bold letters that the patents protect this product from competiton etc, etc, etc.

The VP and Dir also said just about the same things. It is interesting that they wrote the letters on their own. I did not provide them with any template. My lawyer thought that they were actually very excellent recos. Could have been stronger, I suppose, but senior people in the company were writing it and not my colleagues and so they carry quite a bit of weight.

To get around the problem of "Matter of Katigback", my lawyer made the case that my previous petition was not deficient in any way and all the new letters from current wmployer and patents are merely a continuation of accomplishments.

Sorry for the long note.

Cheers All

TrojanBlue
 
Sorry for replying to my own post! But what do you guys think of my qualifications and my petition?

Also, I want to thank everybody on this forum who have helped me a great deal with my NIW. I hope in future, I can also help others.

Thanks everyone.

trojanblue
 
trojanblue said:
Sorry for replying to my own post! But what do you guys think of my qualifications and my petition?

Also, I want to thank everybody on this forum who have helped me a great deal with my NIW. I hope in future, I can also help others.

Thanks everyone.

trojanblue
Click to expand...


Looks pretty good. One thing I would have tried, is to get one or two recommendation letters from scientists from competitors which would more clearly show your national interest. (By getting a lot of letters from companies you work or worked before you show more the companies interest than national interest). And you would be surprised how many competitors are willing to help in such cases since they often have similar cases in their company.
 
honkman said:
Looks pretty good. One thing I would have tried, is to get one or two recommendation letters from scientists from competitors which would more clearly show your national interest. (By getting a lot of letters from companies you work or worked before you show more the companies interest than national interest). And you would be surprised how many competitors are willing to help in such cases since they often have similar cases in their company.
Click to expand...

Thanks honkman. And hello again! Been a while since I replied to any of your posts.

I do have a reco letter from a senior scientist who works for my ex-employer's competitor. The unfortunate part of it is that he too graduated from the same Univ as I did. My attorney claimed that it was alright (after all she was the one who drafted part of the letter!). In the reply to RFE, she mentioned that this letter was from a competitor and his work paralleled my work at my ex-employer's company.

The letter in any case gave me credit for some of the products that I had developed or led in development and where it is/or can be used. Mentions my patents and their use.

This letter is not the "ultra strong" kind. But it is a pretty solid one.

trojanblue
 
honkman said:
Looks pretty good. One thing I would have tried, is to get one or two recommendation letters from scientists from competitors which would more clearly show your national interest. (By getting a lot of letters from companies you work or worked before you show more the companies interest than national interest). And you would be surprised how many competitors are willing to help in such cases since they often have similar cases in their company.
Click to expand...

As a sidebar. None of my recos come from people who have been co-authors of the papers or patents. Some even work in a different industry. The wrote letters since some of the products I work on sell into their industry. A couple claimed that they first came across me while i was a PhD student. One said that he first met me when I was a student but he had kept abreast of tech developments since it was a part of his job and then went on to detail my accomplishments and their merits. All claimed that they had never worked with me or had collaborated with me on any project (and this part is true).

trojanblue
 
trojanblue said:
As a sidebar. None of my recos come from people who have been co-authors of the papers or patents. Some even work in a different industry. The wrote letters since some of the products I work on sell into their industry. A couple claimed that they first came across me while i was a PhD student. One said that he first met me when I was a student but he had kept abreast of tech developments since it was a part of his job and then went on to detail my accomplishments and their merits. All claimed that they had never worked with me or had collaborated with me on any project (and this part is true).

trojanblue
Click to expand...


That sounds even better
 
I can see no resaon you EB1-OR petition will have any problem. With such a strong background.. good luck
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RFE Need Help

Hi All,

I really need help from you all. All the suggetions are welcome. I have submitted 140 as well as 485 in April and just received RFE from NSC. In response they say-

Additional evidence is requested to evaluate eligibility for a NIW pursuant to the test established. Pl. note evidence already submitted demonstrates the proposed emlpoyment has substantial intrinsic merit and will be in national in scope.

Eligibilty for the requested waiver entails demonstrating that the national interest would be advesely affected if a lobor certification were required. You must demonstrate that it would be contrary to the national interest to potentially deprive the prosoective employer of your services by making available to US workes the position you seek.

What do you guys think, how should i reply to it. Please help me.
 
Researcher said:
Hi All,

I really need help from you all. All the suggetions are welcome. I have submitted 140 as well as 485 in April and just received RFE from NSC. In response they say-

Additional evidence is requested to evaluate eligibility for a NIW pursuant to the test established. Pl. note evidence already submitted demonstrates the proposed emlpoyment has substantial intrinsic merit and will be in national in scope.

Eligibilty for the requested waiver entails demonstrating that the national interest would be advesely affected if a lobor certification were required. You must demonstrate that it would be contrary to the national interest to potentially deprive the prosoective employer of your services by making available to US workes the position you seek.

What do you guys think, how should i reply to it. Please help me.
Click to expand...

Is that all you got for your RFE?!? If that is so, then your RFE is a pretty good one. Get a few additional recos, independent ones, that claim how good your work is and how you are at the top of your pack. Get a reco from some one high up in your company to sing hosannas of you. These two points immediately come to mind. Will post more as I think of.

good luck...

trojanblue

ps: It would be very helpful for us if you post your background and the complete RFE. Atleast abbreviated version of ALL the points.
 
wooddr said:
I can see no resaon you EB1-OR petition will have any problem. With such a strong background.. good luck
Click to expand...

Well, a lawyer I spoke to (diff from my NIW lawyer) thinks that while I may qualify for OR, I stand very little to no chance since I dont have a long publication history or citations. I am told by her that patents apparently have no value. Her claim is that CIS thinks anybody can apply and get a patent! What's more, since I am not the sole author of the patent, I have to "share" credit with others and CIS will say that you get only part of the credit and I have not demonstrated how I am equal to or better than the other names in the patents! Anyways, she thinks that because i work in the private industry is no excuse for not having a long publication history and citations. Ergo, OR denied. Dont know how much of what she said is true. But I have to think about it.

trojanblue
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top