My EB-1EA approved at TSC

A

Alex Fisk

Registered Users (C)
Pleased to report the approval of my EB1-EA case.
(RD 08/01/01; ND 08/30/01, AD 05/10/02). No RFE.
No lawyer representation - I\'ve put the case together myself,
and got the employer to sign the cover letter.
I\'ve however consulted two different lawyers before filing
against an hourly fee (and a couple immigration lawyer friends for free),
and got all my questions answered. In retrospect, all that was overkill, but better safe than sorry.
 
Credentials

Education/work:
Ph.D (Chem.) - 99, Ivy League
One of the most prestigious internationally-reknown postdoctoral fellowships, though taken to a less-sterling public university.
Presently staff research scientist at a major National Lab.
PI of two sizable projects, one critical to the US National Security
(statement from the relevant Fed. agency attached, a security clearance issued as an exception by decision of the Agency Director).

Publications:
Over 40 papers in peer-reviewed international journals incl. Nature
and other top-level, 1 patent : almost all as as the first author.
Over 20 conference presentations at major national and international
meetings in the US and abroad, incl. a number of invited talks.
Over 50 invited seminars in some 10 countries, incl. Ivy League,
Berkeley, their foreign equivalents, and key federal labs.
Chapters in 3-4 books.

Publicity:
Some 300 citations, incl. close to 100 over the last year.
A dozen papers in major journals with acknowledgments to me for guidance, direction, insight, etc.
A dozen "news" articles about my work and interwiews in major professional journals (Science, Scientific American, Physics World etc.) and general media (TV and newspapers, incl. a NY Times-level national newspaper).

Honors:
Highest state-level science prize of a major state (awarded to one
person annually by the State Governor). A bunch of small awards and prizes during Ph.D (departmental, university, and national professional society level).

Service:
Membership in one academy and several national and international professional societies (Director\'s certificate of recognition for distinguished service attached from one.)
Reviewer for 6 journals in the field, incl. Nature and such.
Certificate of recognition from one as an exemplary reviewer.
Session chair/member of the Program Committee at a couple international meetings.

Strong letters from major authorities in the field, in the US and abroad (Dept. Chairman - Ivy League school, Dean at another major University, Editor of a top national journal, Director of another federal research center, and such). A couple associated with me as
former bosses or coauthors, but most not. Very strong cover letter from the Director of our Laboratory, emphasizing the national interest angle. An appraisal from HR attesting to my salary to be significantly above that normally offered to candidates at this
level.
 
No Title

Congratulations. Your case was surely a walk in the park. Typically people get this thing with only 5% of your qualifications.
 
Congratulations!

Hi Alex:
Congratulations on your success! I agree with the previous post about people getting their approval with only 5% of your acheivements!
Maybe you can help some of us by writing recommendation letters!
I work in field of Organic/Medicinal Chemistry and have aspirations to apply for EB1
Goodluck with your future endeavors...
krsn1@yahoo.com
 
Random thoughts

Well, I don\'t know many approved with 5% of my record: I think that was a while ago, before 1998 NYSDOT. With 25-50% of my credentials, sure most get it. But some don\'t, or do only after RFE(s) and/or protracted appeals to BIA.

I could have reasonably applied 1.5-2 years ago right after Ph.D. with some 80% chances, but chose to wait till the case is as "slam-done" as it\'s ever gonna be. But then, waiting had its own cost in reducing my career options: consequences of denial are to be optimized in time against the price of waiting according to individual\'s particular circumstances and personality. Some people are more risk-tolerant, I tend to err on the conservative side.
In fact, I had first consulted a lawyer on this matter in early 98,
and then in late 99, but decided to file only in summer 01.

I mean EB1-EA is "extraordinary ability", and should not be taken for anything less. I am sorry, but not any Ph.D, even from a good school, is EA, nor every biomedical postdoc qualifies for NIW. That doesn\'t say they shouldn\'t necessarily get green cards: other channels for that exist. In my observation, virtually everyone who really wanted to get it, eventually got it. I think the bar is actually about the right height: look what happens in Canada where just anyone with a half-baked M.S. degree and a couple years questionable experience can immigrate just fine.

To krsn1: if you wish to post your CV highlights, I\'d be willing
to give you my take.
 
re: thoughts

>>>I mean EB1-EA is "extraordinary ability", and should not be taken >>>for anything less. I am sorry, but not any Ph.D, even from a good >>>school, is EA, nor every biomedical postdoc qualifies for NIW.

Now, now, please make sure your head can still fit in the door after your I-140 approval. Your point is well taken about PhD\'s in general, though. There is a lot of crap coming out of US/Canadian/British universities these days which is lowering the standard of research. However, this has nothing to do with the *legal* requirements for EA or NIW petitions. I work in Big Pharma and it is very common for me to be in a room of scientists where 60-80% of the people immigrated to the United States. IMO, until Americans start going to graduate school, the INS should be lowering the bar to ensure the US\'s competitiveness in this industry.

>>>look what happens in Canada where just anyone with a half-baked >>>M.S. degree and a couple years questionable experience can >>>immigrate just fine.

This comment is unfair. Canada and the US have completely different goals in their immigration policies. Canada is just trying to get bodies into the country to keep the population constant without really caring what they do once they arrive. The US is interesting in being competitive *now*.
 
Where to set the bar

I fully agree with you that a good 2/3 of science Ph.Ds in most US professional settings may be foreign-born, and that few Americans
go to grad. schools in SCIENCE. However, further lowering of the immigration bar as you suggest would only exacerbate and perpetuate this problem, rather than solve it. The thing is, so few Americans
go to grad. schools in science not because they are lazy, stupid,
or unwilling to work hard, but because there\'s absolutely no rational reason to so do. Other advanced professional degrees (J.D., MBA, MD, DDS) are quicker and less aggravating to get, and the payoff is incomparably better. (Note that getting into/through those schools requires the intellectual effort, discipline, and perseverance as hard as most science Ph.Ds, if not more.) One important (though not the only) reason for a low payoff of Ph.D is precisely a huge and constant influx of "alien" scientists willing to bust their b**t off for peanuts. As long as this continues, few americans will go for Ph.Ds, creating the "shortage" of scientists, which is used to justify allowing further influx. Now, I\'m sure there are plenty of foreign lawyers who would dream to practice in the US for 1/4 to 1/2 of the typical US lawyer take. The thing is, they aren\'t permitted, no matter how outstanding their legal skills might be. If they would be tomorrow for any reason, hardly any US students would enroll in law schools to compete with them. And a terrible shortage of lawyers would transpire in the land (which wouldn\'t be bad, per se :>).
Econ. 101, really.
 
my humble thoughts!

I hope I dont sound too arrogant but many (if not all) high-skilled immigrants really are the top 5-10% of their respective populations and thus the average americans would never be able to out-compete them. Just as an average american cannot out-compete the top 5-10% of US citizenary.
Having said that...Let us not forget that although about 50% of Nobel laurettes may be foreign-born, the other 50% are American citizens!
It is exactly for the reasons proposed by Alex, that science is more of a calling than medicine, law or dentistry and is less driven by monetary expectations. Ask those 50% of Nobel laurettes who are US citizens and you\'ll find that monetary gains would be at the bottom of their list (if at all it is on their list) of motivators that drove them to take up the cause of science.
-krsn1
 
No Title

My coment was directed to Alex...He was implying that immigrants are the reason for low wages in science and he also pointed out that it was Econ 101!
Well, in my humble opinion, wages and salaries in a profession, work on the law of supply and demand. The supply is made up of foreign as well as US citizens (and not predominantly foreigners, as ALex pointed out)...Also, AMA (American Medical Association) and other professional school have very strong lobbies in Congress which keeps the supply of Doctors, Lawyers, etc. very low-As a matter of fact, in the last 25 years there have been NO significant increases in number of medical school seats, whereas the demand for Doctors has gone up almost 10-fold! Also, the growth of an industry also creates a higher demand, which in recent years has been in computers and biotech industry-of which the computer industry is already on the downward slope.
About "lowering the bar"...We all may know that there are only about 140,000 employment-based immigrant visas alloted per year, divided up into 5 categories: EB1, EB-2 and EB-3 each with 28.7% each and EB4 and EB5 each with 7.1% Compare that to the US population of more than 300 million! In other words, the highly skilled and skilled workers (EB1, EB2 and EB3 combined!) increase the US population each year by only 0.04%!
The problem is not ONLY that the bar is too high, but also the number of visas are way too low!
And finally, let us not forget this is a country of immigrants!
Goodluck to everyone!
-krsn1
 
in reply to krsn1

the 50% american citizen nobel laurettes you refer to - how many of those are prior EB1\'s !!??
 
Grad School

What you say in your last paragraph is true, however my initial statement about Americans not wanting to go to grad school really does not have anything to do with money for those who continue to pursue a career in science. Thise who chose other careers is one thing. I am talking about chemists, working in industry, who are satisfied with their BS degrees earning a much lower salary than if they had gone to grad school, so money is not their motivation. The problem is that the pursuit of a PhD does not provide the instant gratification that going to work right after a BS degree provides. As you know, it means a lot of long hours in the lab followed by reading, study, and correcting lab reports for the class you TA. At the end of it, you spend 6 months putting it all together so that a committee of profs can rip you apart and then put your thesis in the library to collect dust. All this glory for just enough money to scrape by and hopefully have enough left for a beer on Saturday night. Until such a time that native-born scientists are willing to make these sacrifices in large enough numbers again, the US has no choice but to import their talent. BS-level chemists do not have the training to sustain the pharmaceutical, petroleum, plastics, and chemical industries. Brian.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top