Help with NIW

T

trojanblue

Registered Users (C)
Hi,

I have EB2-NIW petition pending (I-140 stage). Please give me your considerate opinion on what my chances are with my quals.

1. PhD from a very good and well known US Univ.
2. About 15 journal publications and conference presentations.
3. 1 student award presented by NIST -- recognized nationally in the US (I think!)
4. 5 Letters of reco -- 1 from my prof and 4 from former colleagues. 1 more will get from another prof (from another university) who has never worked with me (third party ref)
5. Worked on developing instruments for medical research such as proteins, breast tumor etc.
6. 2 patents awarded -- 1 US and 1 international
7. Do not publish journal papers anymore since company has forbidden it -- propietary secrets! Only conference presentations.
8. Have been invited as an instructor by an International organization to conduct a workshop for fellow scientists from American corporations. Do not have a formal invitation letter but have an email from them regarding the results of the survey they conducted to get a feedback on the workshop I conducted. The results are excellent -- got 100% satisfaction for course rating and 3.9/4 for teaching.
9. Member of 3 professional organizations (IEEE, SPIE, MAS)

Any opinions are appreciated.

Thank you
 
You need much more reference letters from top scientists who didn't work with you but are experts in your field who claim that your work is essential for the US. With just one letter I don't think you have good chances. Several lawyers told me as a rule of thumb that you should collect about 10-12 letters from independent scientists for your petition (NIW, EA and OR) and than use the best of them. Reference letters from former coworkers are pretty much useless as you can see on this page:

http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/admindec3/


For NIW it is critical to show that the US benefits from you and the easiest way to show this is by reference letters. The rest of the qualifications are nice but not that important for NIW
 
You see, that is my problem. I am not into pure research. My work is more into product development and new applications. So, I do not have much contacts with scientists in this field because there are so few of them. There are only 2-3 companies (all small) in the US that work in the field that I do and they are all into product development. What exactly do I do right now?

The former colleagues, strictly speaking, have Ph.D in the same field and use the techniques that I work on. They are aware of the products that I develop, understand their uses. No one has been my "co-worker". I have known them because of University contacts and have kept in touch with them.

thanks for all your help.
 
trojanblue said:
You see, that is my problem. I am not into pure research. My work is more into product development and new applications. So, I do not have much contacts with scientists in this field because there are so few of them. There are only 2-3 companies (all small) in the US that work in the field that I do and they are all into product development. What exactly do I do right now?

The former colleagues, strictly speaking, have Ph.D in the same field and use the techniques that I work on. They are aware of the products that I develop, understand their uses. No one has been my "co-worker". I have known them because of University contacts and have kept in touch with them.

thanks for all your help.
Click to expand...


You don't have to work in research for NIW. Yo can also work in PD or related fields but it is essential to get recommendation letters from scientists, high ranking busniss guys, government people etc. who don't know you personally to habe a chance of success in NIW (and also in OR and EA). It might be helpful if you could say in which field you are working. Such people don't have to work in the exact same field but at least in very close related ones.
 
I have a Ph. D in Materials Science and work on developing x-ray instruments for medical and semiconductor fields. I have developed products that are already being sold to semiconductor metrological companies and medical researchers. All the references I have are from people who have Ph.Ds from Materials Science. One of them is from my prof. Another is from a scientist who also works in x-ray field but is associated with a company that my company regards as a competitor. 2 recos are from people who work in semi conductor field but widely use x-rays and understand the products that I develop. 1 is from a research prof who works principally in semiconductor devices but also uses x-rays extensively. 1 prof, who has promised to give me a reco, does not know me at all but only knows me professionally, and knows my background because his research lab bought one of the products that I had developed and I had helped him out in setting it up so that he can conduct his experiments. His background is physics and works in the physics department (at a different university) but works on studing materials.

hope this helps
 
This sounds great, these guys are not your co-workers so their word counts.

Be sure to get letters that emphasize how widely your instruments are used in the US and how the research/development supported by your instruments has a measurable impact on the field, has an impact on a market which is Xmill$s. and so on.

Money talks ! The letter writers don't need to have PhD's. A CEO or VP for research in a corporation that is depending on your developments emphasizing the economic impact of your work and how x number of employees depend on your instruments etc etc.

Also, how did you address the issue that getting an LC is not an option. That seems to be the key point in denials these days.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This sounds great, these guys are not your co-workers so their word counts.

Be sure to get letters that emphasize how widely your instruments are used in the US and how the research/development supported by your instruments has a measurable impact on the field, has an impact on a market which is Xmill$s. and so on.

Money talks ! The letter writers don't need to have PhD's. A CEO or VP for research in a corporation that is depending on your developments emphasizing the economic impact of your work and how x number of employees depend on your instruments etc etc.

Also, how did you address the issue that getting an LC is not an option. That seems to be the key point in denials these days.

______________________My reply follows_________________________

All have claimed that it will reduce the cost of research and development (no dollar value). They also pointed to my patent and claimed that the patent demonstrates inherent increased reliablity of measurements and lower costs because of cost of replacement of instruments goes down. No mention of how many employees use it. Their claim was based on the fact that they have (or had) extensively used x-ray instruments and they clearly appreciate the new developments and they can clearly see the costs of research and development going down. They also mention that these kind of developments will play a role in reducing medical treatments in the future too -- pointing to breast cancer research etc. (although they work in semiconductor industry, they still made it a point to note it too). They pointed to my patents and their importance. The thing I am most worried about is that I came to know of them when I was in grad school and have kept in touch with them. I have never collaborated with them on any projects, none of the papers, conference presentations or my patents mention them as an author or co-inventor. Since their current focus is slightly different from mine, I decided to take recos from only Ph.Ds in materials science hoping CIS will admit it since they have the qualifications to make an informed judgement. I hope that CIS does not reject them since they do not work on x-rays but only use it as an analytical technique.

With LC, I am screwed since I dont have the time to wait for it. my H1B will expire and I will have to return home. Hence NIW, since I can get the priority date which will help me extend my H1-B. The argument my attorney has made is that I do not have the time and it is not in the best interests of American employers to let him go home since Lc is taking 2-3years for processing. Hence, waive the requirements.

Thank you for taking the time to give me your considerations. I greatly appreciate it. Right now, I need all the help I can get. I would lile to make my case as strong as possible so that they dont reject my petition.
 
> The argument my attorney has made is that I do not have the time
> and it is not in the best interests of American employers to let
> him go home since Lc is taking 2-3years for processing. Hence,
> waive the requirements.

Uuups.
Unfortunately there are AAO decisions that the argument that LC takes too long is not valid. In the cuckoo world of INS, labor certification only takes a couple of weeks. (The fact that CT for example is pushing 5 years for non-RIR right now, does not enter into their delusional little kingdom.)
You might get an RFE on that.

I am still wondering: Have you filed yet ? Or are you collecting evidence at this time ?

If you need another letter from someone working with x-rays, drop me a PM.
 
Uuups.
Unfortunately there are AAO decisions that the argument that LC takes too long is not valid. In the cuckoo world of INS, labor certification only takes a couple of weeks. (The fact that CT for example is pushing 5 years for non-RIR right now, does not enter into their delusional little kingdom.)
You might get an RFE on that.

I am still wondering: Have you filed yet ? Or are you collecting evidence at this time ?

If you need another letter from someone working with x-rays, drop me a PM.

____________________My reply follows_____________________________

My lawyer is certainly aware of my LC issue. She is going to provide evidence for that. I needed to get prority date on my petition. Hence my attorney filed all the papers (bare-bones application) as she called it. She is confident that INS will not reject my petition outright and will RFE for reco letters. But atleast, 1 year would have passed before I get that and hence my H1-B can get renewed. This is the reason I did not (frankly could not) send any reco letters. I am still searching for people who can give me recos (ind recos) to strengthen my case.



My only worry is: what if INS still rejects my petition? I realise I am trying to buy time before which I can find another employer who will apply for my LC. Atleast then, my H1B can keep getting extended and not go home. My hope is that they will apply for a standard LC and get the priority date. Then, 6 months later or so, they can change it to an RIR and still maintain the original priority date. Hope this works. I really dont know if it will.

BTW, what do you guys think of the recos I have been getting so far? Any good?
 
> Hence my attorney filed all the papers (bare-bones application) as
> she called it. She is confident that INS will not reject my petition outright

She might be wrong. Usually you get RFE's, but there is another NIW case posted here were the I140 was denied without RFE.

In your case this would be a shame. From what you are writing you actually do have a pretty strong case for for NIW, if it got denied due to insufficient documents you are back to square1.

It might have been a more worthwhile strategy to file a regular LC and hold off on the NIW until you have a watertight case. An LC pending for 1 year I believe makes you eligible for a 7th year extension.
 
hadron said:
> Hence my attorney filed all the papers (bare-bones application) as
> she called it. She is confident that INS will not reject my petition outright

She might be wrong. Usually you get RFE's, but there is another NIW case posted here were the I140 was denied without RFE.

In your case this would be a shame. From what you are writing you actually do have a pretty strong case for for NIW, if it got denied due to insufficient documents you are back to square1.

It might have been a more worthwhile strategy to file a regular LC and hold off on the NIW until you have a watertight case. An LC pending for 1 year I believe makes you eligible for a 7th year extension.
Click to expand...


From what I hear, no NIW gets rejected without an RFE. My attorney tells me that you always get one unless the petition itself is wrong and does not meet even those minimal qualifications. The way it works, from my understanding is this:

If you have a solid case and the INS thinks so, you will get an RFE with 84 days to reply. If INs threatens to dismiss your petition, they will still give you 30 days to reply. This is when my attorney is going to make the final case.

I cannot withdraw my petition right now. It is already pending for about 9 months now. I will have to go with what my attorney tells me. I trust my attorney because she does not fluff anything. She gives it to me straight as she sees it. I went with her because she is highly regarded by those who got their green cards from her. So far she has not mentioned to me that my I-140 will definitely get rejected because I did not send in my reco letters with the petition. But I had sent virtually everything else. For example, my patents were pending at that time and were finally approved later.
 
trojanblue said:
From what I hear, no NIW gets rejected without an RFE. My attorney tells me that you always get one unless the petition itself is wrong and does not meet even those minimal qualifications. The way it works, from my understanding is this:

If you have a solid case and the INS thinks so, you will get an RFE with 84 days to reply. If INs threatens to dismiss your petition, they will still give you 30 days to reply. This is when my attorney is going to make the final case.

I cannot withdraw my petition right now. It is already pending for about 9 months now. I will have to go with what my attorney tells me. I trust my attorney because she does not fluff anything. She gives it to me straight as she sees it. I went with her because she is highly regarded by those who got their green cards from her. So far she has not mentioned to me that my I-140 will definitely get rejected because I did not send in my reco letters with the petition. But I had sent virtually everything else. For example, my patents were pending at that time and were finally approved later.
Click to expand...

I hope you attorney is correct that you always get a RFE, to be honest I have my doubts and even in this forum you see that it is not always the case:

http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=142011

But I hope you are lucky and everything goes well. It is always ahrd to predict what the USCIS is doing.
 
In my original petition, my attorney specifically tackled the issue of the NYSDOT decision and has made a point by point case regarding the criterion set forth in that decision. I wish to mention the point my attorney made for the third prong: "The national interest would be adversely affected if a labor certification were required"

For this the attorney wrote:

"...the requirement of a LC would adversely affect the national interest. He possesses unique expertise in the area of x-ray tech and is a key researcher in this area. Requiring Lc would adversely affect research in this area and deprive us of his expertise."

One paragraph showing that I am a person of exceptional ability by pointing to my IIT-JEE background. "...approx 200,000 students take the exam....about 1% qualify"

"The LC process would undermine these important reseach projects and will cause signigficant delays in the development of ......(many projects)....as well as the dissemination of these materials to students, teachers, scientists and industry."


"The time required for LC would adversely affect the national interest and the important benefits derived from the applicant. Furthermore, the process does not lend itself to finding someone with the knowledge and experience necessary in this case" [emphasis in the original]


My questions are: what do you think of these arguments? what do you suggest I do to strengthen these arguments? what kind of evidence do you think I should produce?

Thanks in advance...
 
trojanblue said:
One paragraph showing that I am a person of exceptional ability by pointing to my IIT-JEE background. "...approx 200,000 students take the exam....about 1% qualify"
Click to expand...
Has your attorney cited the "CBS 60 Minutes" episode about IIT. It could be very useful for your case. Here are some excerpts from that:
"The United States imports oil from Saudi Arabia, cars from Japan, TVs from Korea and whiskey from Scotland. So what do we import from India? We import people, really smart people. And as you're about to see, the smartest, most successful, most influential Indians who've migrated to the US seem to share a common credential: They're graduates of the Indian Institute of Technology, better known as IIT. Made up of seven campuses throughout India, IIT may be the most important university you've never heard of."
 
trojanblue said:
In my original petition, my attorney specifically tackled the issue of the NYSDOT decision and has made a point by point case regarding the criterion set forth in that decision. I wish to mention the point my attorney made for the third prong: "The national interest would be adversely affected if a labor certification were required"

For this the attorney wrote:

"...the requirement of a LC would adversely affect the national interest. He possesses unique expertise in the area of x-ray tech and is a key researcher in this area. Requiring Lc would adversely affect research in this area and deprive us of his expertise."

One paragraph showing that I am a person of exceptional ability by pointing to my IIT-JEE background. "...approx 200,000 students take the exam....about 1% qualify"

"The LC process would undermine these important reseach projects and will cause signigficant delays in the development of ......(many projects)....as well as the dissemination of these materials to students, teachers, scientists and industry."


"The time required for LC would adversely affect the national interest and the important benefits derived from the applicant. Furthermore, the process does not lend itself to finding someone with the knowledge and experience necessary in this case" [emphasis in the original]


My questions are: what do you think of these arguments? what do you suggest I do to strengthen these arguments? what kind of evidence do you think I should produce?

Thanks in advance...
Click to expand...

I am just surprised :confused: . At this point of time, when because of numerous reasons like low economy, job cuts, lay offs, H1 quota reduction etc etc, number of NIW applications has shooted up like anything you have submitted your application without any recommendation letter :eek: In NIW cases reco letters are the most efficient tool to establish the elligibility of the candidate.

And then regarding your attorney's claim that you did good in some entrance exam of some school, USCIS will probably not give any importance to this. Regarding high number of students taking this exam, they may say that these countries have huge population so these numbers mean nothing.

I would suggest in order to avoid depression in future, don't keep much expectation from USCIS regarding your present application. Start exploring other options.
 
trojanblue said:
In my original petition, my attorney specifically tackled the issue of the NYSDOT decision and has made a point by point case regarding the criterion set forth in that decision. I wish to mention the point my attorney made for the third prong: "The national interest would be adversely affected if a labor certification were required"

For this the attorney wrote:

"...the requirement of a LC would adversely affect the national interest. He possesses unique expertise in the area of x-ray tech and is a key researcher in this area. Requiring Lc would adversely affect research in this area and deprive us of his expertise."

One paragraph showing that I am a person of exceptional ability by pointing to my IIT-JEE background. "...approx 200,000 students take the exam....about 1% qualify"

"The LC process would undermine these important reseach projects and will cause signigficant delays in the development of ......(many projects)....as well as the dissemination of these materials to students, teachers, scientists and industry."


"The time required for LC would adversely affect the national interest and the important benefits derived from the applicant. Furthermore, the process does not lend itself to finding someone with the knowledge and experience necessary in this case" [emphasis in the original]


My questions are: what do you think of these arguments? what do you suggest I do to strengthen these arguments? what kind of evidence do you think I should produce?

Thanks in advance...
Click to expand...

If you read through AAO's decitions on http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/admindec3/, you will see that:
1) Simply say you are a smart/strong/exceptional person is not enough to address LC issue;
2) Labor shortage also will not help, because this is why LC process is there.
3) LC takes too long is not a workable exceuse, they would ask you take/renew H1-B instead;
 
tom2 said:
I am just surprised :confused: . At this point of time, when because of numerous reasons like low economy, job cuts, lay offs, H1 quota reduction etc etc, number of NIW applications has shooted up like anything you have submitted your application without any recommendation letter :eek: In NIW cases reco letters are the most efficient tool to establish the elligibility of the candidate.
Click to expand...

As I pointed out in one of my earlier postings, I did this to make sure I get a priority date so that I can get my H1-B renewed. My attorney had mentioned that INS will ask for RFE regarding the letters of reco. That is what I am concentrating on now.

I am also persuing other options like a standard LC. But I do not wish to give up my NIW petition without making a strong case and putting up a godd fight. I realize that my petition may still get rejected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top