NIW or EB1 - Advice Please, Anyone.

R

RexSolomon

Registered Users (C)
My friend was recently awarded a U.S. Patent for a en-masse emergency egress device that would prevent multiple fatalities due to entrapment in burning high-rise buildings such as what occured at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 and other infamous skyscraper fires in the past.

He is currently in talks with the Small Business Administration people in New York to bring the patented device to the public.

He was formerly with Cisco Systems as a systems engineer and was formerly Executive Director for a University Computer Center (the university population was about 33,000 students).

In your opinion, would he qualify for an NIW or EB1?

Would you have any suggestions for him?

I'm new to this forum, so please pardon my ignorance. Thanks!
 
If he can wait, it is better not to rush. If he is sure that the patent will be practically implicated some time soon, it is better to wait and have much stronger case.

If invention will be used even just 1 week after petition filing date they will likely disregard it as an evidence for major contribution in a field.
 
When is evidence Acceptable? Essence of NIW?

Thank you for your replies.

AlexK's response though, has me confused:

---"If invention will be used even just 1 week AFTER petition filing date they will likely disregard it as an evidence for major contribution in a field."---

Should he then demonstrate his patented device BEFORE the petition filing date to make it acceptable as evidence?

On 9/11/01 terrorists "analyzed and exploited" the fact that the World Trade Center towers (and nearly all skyscrapers in America) do not have en-masse emergency egress devices to effect a maximum number of fatalities.

There have also been hundreds of other fatalities due to entrapment in skyscraper fires in America's history (see skyscrapersafety.COM). It is clearly a long-standing problem.

Up to the present, his patented device seems to be the only intelligent 21st century-class solution.

It seems to me (as a novice in this website) that it would be to the benefit of the 'National Interest' to have him 'evangelize' around the country to make high-rise buildings safer for its occupants and visitors - all across America.

Isn't that the essence of the National Interest Waiver?

Your replies are very much appreciated and anticipated. Thank you!
 
Re: When is evidence Acceptable? Essence of NIW?

Originally posted by RexSolomon

It seems to me (as a novice in this website) that it would be to the benefit of the 'National Interest' to have him 'evangelize' around the country to make high-rise buildings safer for its occupants and visitors - all across America.

Isn't that the essence of the National Interest Waiver?

Your replies are very much appreciated and anticipated. Thank you!
Click to expand...

The essence of NIW is that the United States would be hurt if your friend had to undergo the time consuming step of labor certification. The article in question here is already invented so nothing is at stake. The applicant also has to show outstanding ability (i.e. that he can use this device better than anybody else) and will continue to do research on such devices.

IMO, there is no case here. Some attorneys will do NIW evaluations for free (www.usvisanews.com is one), so you might want an actual legal opinion. Remember, it is your friend that is applying, not the device, and all of his credentials must be evaluated. One patent is not going to cut it.

Brian
 
I do not want to discourage him to apply. Positive decision is very much dependent on luck and on whoes table it will end up.

Please follow this link and read denied appeals. You will get goosebumps.
http://www.immigration.gov/graphics/lawsregs/admindec3/B2/index.htm

Of course in those cases they simply want to justify that they are always right. But to be ready for any outcome and to get your case much stronger it is better not to repeat someone else's mistakes.

For example, never ask to write in the letters that the patent is foundation for future, but rather focus on the proven cases that it has already being used or applied or referenced, or something else.

If someone have told me about this link before I would have build my case in different way.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alexk,

I believe that you inserted the wrong link. The administrative decisions on BCIS website contain AAO decisions on appeals. But I share the key point in your posting on the denied appeals--although the decisions tend to favour BCIS, but they can be useful in building stronger petitions. I will continue to recommend that new petitioners take time to read them. By learning from those decisions and this forum, it is easier to avoid common pitfalls.

Topew
 
Thank you for your input!

Thank you guys for the valuable information.
I will ask my friend (and I too will) read through the links...
and the 'horror stories'.
AlexK is right. Best know what frame of mind the BCIS is
from the records before writing a petition.

More power to all of you!

Rex
 
There is one NIW case that is hidden in extraordinary ability folder. It has this name: jan1003_01b2203.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top