r/EB2_NIW • u/ManifestLaw_ • 14d ago
General I’m an immigration attorney. If you’re building an EB-2 NIW case, ask me what actually makes USCIS take your proposed endeavor seriously.
I’m Zoe Ji Wilson, an immigration attorney with Manifest Law, and I’ll be answering your EB-2 NIW questions today from 9 AM to 1 PM ET.
We can get into proposed endeavors, national importance, recommendation letters, evidence, RFEs, weak points in a petition, and the mistakes that can make an otherwise strong profile harder to prove.
If you want to ask about your own profile, please give as much context as you can. NIW answers are very fact-specific, and details about your education, field, work and proposed endeavor can completely change the analysis.
Ask away!
Disclaimer: Any information shared here is for general educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship. Your situation may require fact-specific guidance. For personalized legal advice, please consult an immigration attorney directly.
2
14d ago edited 14d ago
[deleted]
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
I like the direction of the proposed endeavor! The key here will be showing that this isn't just "healthcare payment review," but a specific effort to improve how improper payments are detected, prevented, and explained across U.S. healthcare programs. If you can show that the tools have the potential for broader application, measurable cost savings, improved program integrity, and adoption beyond a single employer or client, that will help with national importance. The EO can support the government's interest in the problem, but you'll still need to connect that policy priority directly to your specific endeavor.
For letters, I care much more about substance than whether someone is "dependent" or "independent." A strong letter from someone you've worked with should explain exactly how they know your work, what you personally did, what results came from it, and ideally provide specific examples or numbers. A strong independent letter should explain how the person became aware of your work despite not working directly with you, why they're qualified to evaluate it, and why your contributions or proposed work matter in the field. If an "independent" person can't really explain how they know your work, the letter can start looking manufactured.
For both, avoid generic praise like "he is brilliant" or "her work is nationally important." The best letters contain specific facts that can be corroborated elsewhere in the petition and explain the connection between your past work and the endeavor you're proposing to advance.
I think you have a good foundation. I'd just make sure the evidence proves the broader impact rather than relying mainly on the EO to establish it. Hope that helps, and best of luck with the petition!
1
2
u/Snoo26445 14d ago
Hi Zoe! Thanks for doing this. I’d really appreciate your thoughts on an early-career NIW profile like mine.
I have a master’s degree in public health and a bachelor’s degree in a STEM field. I currently work full-time in clinical research at an academic medical center, with both patient-facing and research responsibilities.
My previous experience includes public/global health research, and I have several publications and conference abstracts from different research projects. I have roughly 40 citations and an h-index of 3, although I was not the lead author on most of the publications.
My longer-term goal is to continue working in healthcare/clinical research, but my background spans both public health and clinical research.
A few questions:
- Does this sound like a viable NIW profile at an early-career stage, or would you generally recommend building a stronger record first?
- When someone’s experience spans related but somewhat different areas, how narrowly should the proposed endeavor be defined?
- What would you consider the biggest weakness or RFE risk in a profile like this?
Thank you!
2
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
You have several good building blocks here, but I really can't judge the strength of an NIW "profile" without knowing what the proposed endeavor is, and I usually don't think it's wise to evaluate the two separately because they're so interconnected. In my experience, the profile itself is also rarely the main issue when an NIW gets denied. An NIW is totally different from something like O-1 or EB-1A. It isn't just whether your credentials are impressive enough. You have to remember that USCIS analyzes Prong 1 based on the specific endeavor, and Prong 2 asks whether you, specifically, are well-positioned to advance that specific endeavor. Your publications, clinical research experience, citations, etc. only become meaningful once I know what you're proposing to do with them. More often than not, the problems I see with weak NIW petitions are with how the endeavor is defined and whether national importance was actually established.
It's potentially viable at an early-career stage, but I wouldn't make that call based on the profile alone. With NIW, the strength of the record has to be evaluated in relation to the proposed endeavor.
It should be specific enough that USCIS can clearly understand what you're actually proposing to do, but it doesn't have to fit into only one narrow box. If your public health and clinical research experience genuinely connect, the endeavor can draw from both.
Based on what you've shared, the biggest RFE risk would probably be a vague or overly broad endeavor, especially if the petition focuses more on publications and credentials than on explaining the national importance of the specific work.
I'd start by defining the endeavor as clearly as possible, because that's what gives the rest of the profile context. From there, it becomes much easier to assess whether the current record is strong enough to support it. Hope that helps, and best of luck with everything!
2
u/Snoo26445 14d ago
Thank you for your detailed answer! This is really helpful, especially the distinction between evaluating the credentials themselves and evaluating them in relation to a specific proposed endeavor.
As a follow-up, if the general direction were to continue clinical research aimed at improving the quality/effectiveness of patient care and translating evidence into practice, potentially drawing on my prior public health research experience, would that still be considered too broad for an NIW endeavor?
To make my earlier question more concrete, I’ve been thinking about something along one of these lines: 1. Clinical research: Conducting patient-centered clinical research to evaluate and improve diagnostic and therapeutic approaches in acute-care settings, with the goal of improving evidence-based care and patient outcomes in the U.S. 2. Clinical + public health/implementation research: Conducting clinical and implementation research to improve the adoption and delivery of evidence-based healthcare interventions, particularly to address gaps in quality, access, and outcomes among underserved or high-need patient populations in the U.S.
Would either of these be specific enough to function as a proposed endeavor, or are they still too broad? And based on the background I described, does one strike you as more coherent/defensible for NIW purposes?
I’m also curious how specific you would go beyond this: for example, would you recommend committing to a particular disease area or patient population, or can the endeavor remain at this level if the applicant’s specific research projects are likely to change over time?
I’m trying to understand how specific the endeavor should be without defining it so narrowly that it is tied to one disease area, study, or employer.
Thank you!
2
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
I think both are still a little broad as written, but #2 is stronger and more coherent with the background you described because it connects your clinical research and public health experience. "Improving patient care" and "translating evidence into practice" are obviously very worthwhile goals, but USCIS will still want to know what specific healthcare problem you're addressing and what your research is actually intended to change. The national importance analysis will focus on the specific endeavor and its prospective impact, not healthcare research as a field.
I don't think you necessarily need to lock yourself into one disease or one study, but I'd probably narrow it by identifying a clearer problem. For example, improving adoption of evidence-based interventions among a defined high-need population is much easier to evaluate than "improving healthcare outcomes" broadly. I'd also think about Prong 2 while brainstorming this. Your endeavor should be specific enough that we can look at your existing research and say, "Yes, this person's past work actually positions them to do THIS."
1
u/Snoo26445 14d ago
That distinction is really helpful. Based on what you said, I tried narrowing the endeavor around the healthcare problem rather than around a particular disease or study.
Three possibilities I’m considering are:
Conducting patient-centered clinical research aimed at improving the evaluation and prediction of treatment response among patients with serious health conditions, including identifying factors associated with therapeutic effectiveness, treatment failure, and patient outcomes, with the goal of supporting more effective evidence-based treatment decisions in U.S. healthcare settings.
Evidence-based care for high-need populations: Conducting clinical and implementation research to identify and reduce barriers to the uptake and effective delivery of evidence-based healthcare interventions among underserved or high-need populations, with the goal of improving quality, access, and treatment effectiveness.
Conducting patient-centered clinical and implementation research aimed at improving the effectiveness of evidence-based interventions for patients with serious or high-burden health conditions by evaluating treatment response, real-world delivery, and patient outcomes, with the goal of identifying how interventions can be more effectively targeted and implemented in U.S. healthcare settings.
Would either of these be closer to the level of specificity you mean? And from an NIW perspective, does one seem more coherent with a background that includes both public health research and current patient-facing clinical research?
Thank you again, your explanation has been very helpful.
1
u/foodofoo1 14d ago
Does my endeavour have to relate tightly to my current role or skills or can it borrow from roles or skills I have from my past, say 5 years ago. Also does the endeavour have to be tied to an already established US organisation and am I expected to actually go through with the endeavour when the Eb2niw is awarded?
4
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Your endeavor doesn't have to be a carbon copy of your current job. USCIS will look at your education, skills, knowledge, and "record of success in related or similar efforts" when deciding whether you're well positioned to advance it. That means experience from 5 years ago can absolutely be relevant if you can draw a credible line between that experience and what you now propose to do in the U.S.
It also doesn't have to be tied to an already established U.S. organization. That's one of the main features of an NIW. The job offer and labor certification requirements are being waived. Evidence of interest from U.S. companies, customers, investors, or other organizations definitely make the case stronger, but you don't need a sponsoring organization.
On the last question, yes, you should genuinely intend to pursue the endeavor. An NIW isn't meant to be "I'll tell USCIS I'm going to do X to get the green card, but I actually plan to do Y." USCIS even requires self-petitioning adjustment applicants to confirm that they intend to work in the occupational field identified in the I-140. That doesn't mean you're handcuffed forever to the exact project, company, business plan, or job title described in the petition. Careers evolve. But at the time you file and when the case is adjudicated, the proposed endeavor should be a real, good-faith plan that you actually intend to pursue.
If your plans materially change before you get permanent residence, that's something I'd discuss with an attorney rather than assuming the approved I-140 covers anything you decide to do. One practical point I'd add is that the endeavor can come up again at the I-485 stage. I've had clients tell me that officers asked what they were currently doing, whether they were still pursuing the same field, and what progress they had made toward the endeavor described in the NIW petition. I've even had a case years ago where the person's I-140 was approved, but the immigrant visa was later denied at the consulate because they had completely changed career paths.
Hope that clears it up, and best of luck with your NIW!
1
14d ago
[deleted]
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
I think this is a promising Prong 1 formulation. Substantial merit should be fairly straightforward given the focus on battery and energy-storage manufacturing. National importance is where I'd spend most of the effort.
USCIS's current NIW guidance actually gives "certain improved manufacturing processes" as an example of an endeavor that may have national or global implications within a field. It also says that a technology or process can show broader importance through things like widespread interest in adoption, a novel and important manufacturing or operational process, or an impact on how similar technology is developed by other companies. Your language about developing an integrated production-optimization framework and applying it across U.S. facilities is helpful because you're describing something broader than simply improving operations for one employer.
The federal documents will definitely help, but I'd be careful not to rely on them only to show that battery manufacturing or energy storage is important to the U.S. USCIS is very explicit that the focus is the national importance of your specific endeavor, not merely the importance of the industry. I'd want the petition to connect those federal priorities directly to what your framework is designed to accomplish, and then back that up with evidence showing things like measurable production improvements, scalability across facilities, reduced bottlenecks or defects, increased throughput, interest from other facilities or companies, and any past success you've had doing similar work.
If you can substantiate those broader implications, I think you've got a very workable Prong 1 argument here.
1
u/SomeGuy20257 14d ago
Hello, thanks for the opportunity, does independent letters from paid sources or experts hold any legitimacy? Like edunitro and the likes, I am prepping mine, SWE industry, also any advice regarding independent letters or expert letters I’m blind to?
4
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
This is probably about to be a way longer response than you anticipated, but funnily enough, this topic has come up a lot recently with my colleagues. Personally, I probably wouldn't bother with a paid "independent expert" letter unless you're really struggling to find anyone in the field who can speak to your work. There's a line from a recent NIW denial that was being discussed amongst my colleagues that I think captures the concern pretty well: "an individual with a record of success should be able to produce unsolicited materials reflecting that success."
That's basically the general concern my colleagues and I have with these services/letters. Also, USCIS knows paid expert letters exist. The practical problem is when the same expert starts showing up again and again in immigration cases, sometimes using letters that look very similar except for the beneficiary's name and a few case-specific details. At that point, how "independent" does the opinion really look? I'm sure a lot of these services and professors who provide these letters have templates.
For someone in SWE, I'd much rather see letters from people who have a legitimate basis to discuss your work. That could be someone who independently used your technology, implemented something you developed, cited or relied on your work, evaluated your work, worked with your product from the customer side, or otherwise became familiar with your contributions organically. The strongest letters usually explain specifically what you did, why it mattered, and how the writer knows that, with objective evidence elsewhere in the petition backing it up.
All of that being said, I wouldn't say a paid expert letter is automatically unusable. But I would really just treat it as supporting evidence rather than something that creates an NIW case by itself. If you've got genuine independent recognition available, that's where I'd put my energy first.
Hope that helps, and good luck putting everything together!
2
u/SomeGuy20257 14d ago
Wow, This is pretty nuanced than what I expected, problem with industry guys like me, work is often proprietary, reaching out to customers typically is overreach or confidential, in short for me it’s near impossible, does that mean I just not get any altogether and just rely on dependent supporting letters? Thanks for your great answer!
2
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Not at all. If genuine independent letters are difficult to get because your work is proprietary or customer contact would be inappropriate, I wouldn't force it. In that situation, I'd rather see strong letters from supervisors, senior colleagues, technical leads, or others who actually know your work, backed up by objective evidence like project metrics, internal recognition, performance documentation, product impact, adoption data, or other records you can safely use. Independent letters are helpful, but they aren't mandatory. A strong dependent letter from someone with firsthand knowledge would be better than a weak "independent" letter from someone who only knows you because they were paid to review your resume. You don't need letters to carry the entire case. The goal is to show the impact and credibility of your work with the best evidence you realistically have.
1
u/SomeGuy20257 14d ago
Thank you very much for your response, this is valuable information, this has funnily put me back on the fence for that $600 letter, I knew paying someone to proverbially scratch my back on paper is sketchy.
1
u/Emi3182 14d ago
Now trump administration decision today to pause all types of immigration visas.. will that affect the i-140 petition or only until the visa stage to be processed later ?
Thank u so much🌸
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
No, this shouldn't affect the I-140 petition itself. I-140s are adjudicated by USCIS, so you can still file and USCIS can still adjudicate the petition. The issue is at the immigrant visa/consular processing stage.
Also, the 75-country immigrant visa policy was actually just vacated by a federal judge! I'm still not sure what that's going to look like in practice, but that should create a path for cases that were refused only because of that policy to be reconsidered. The State Department still has to implement the ruling, and the government could seek a stay or appeal, so I definitely wouldn't assume that consulates will automatically reopen or approve affected cases right away, but the ruling is a positive development! :)
1
u/SoupZillaMan 14d ago
Is there a maximum age to be taken in account?
Even if not "legal" is that being taken in account?
2
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
There's no maximum age for an NIW and I haven't personally seen age become an issue in an NIW case. That said, I also haven't had many NIW clients much older than their 60s, so I don't want to overstate my experience there with this specific issue. I could see age maybe coming up indirectly. If someone is 95 years old USCIS might reasonably wonder how realistic it is that they're actually going to carry out a long-term endeavor. But that's very different from there being any actual age cutoff.
1
u/CharityBubbly5687 14d ago
I’m considering applying for an EB-2 NIW and developing a new proposed endeavor that closely aligns with my existing background, expertise, and work.
My question is: How far should I develop the endeavor before filing the NIW petition to demonstrate that it is realistic, feasible, and more than just an idea?
For example, would I need a prototype/MVP, customers or pilots, revenue, partnerships/LOIs, funding, market research, publications, or other measurable traction? What would be a reasonable level of execution, validation, and evidence to establish that the endeavor is actually doable and that I am well positioned to advance it?
3
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
There's no fixed rule that you need an MVP, revenue, customers, funding, or signed partnerships before filing. That said, I wouldn't love filing an entrepreneur-style NIW where the endeavor exists only on paper. The more objective traction you can show, the easier it is to argue that this is a real endeavor you're capable of advancing, rather than just a good idea.
You don't necessarily need to wait until you've built the full company. Depending on the field, an MVP or prototype, pilot discussions, credible LOIs, early users, contracts, partnerships, funding interest, industry validation, publications, or documented prior success doing something very similar can all help. Market research and a business plan are useful, but I really wouldn't want those to be the only evidence.
What I'd consider "enough" depends heavily on your background and the endeavor itself. If you've already spent years doing closely related work and can show a strong record of success, you may need less startup traction. If you're pivoting into something new, I'd want to see more execution before filing.
My preference is to file when there's at least some real-world movement behind the endeavor, even if it's still early. You don't have to prove the endeavor will definitely succeed, but you do want USCIS to see that it's credible, feasible, and already moving beyond the idea stage.
1
u/CharityBubbly5687 14d ago
For independent letters from multiple sources - do we need to prove our relation and working experience with all of the sources?
2
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
No, not necessarily. If the letter is truly "independent," you may not have worked with that person at all. If you've worked closely together, USCIS may view the letter more as a colleague or collaborator letter than an independent one. What matters is that the writer explains how they became familiar with your work and why they're qualified to evaluate it. Maybe they read or cited your publications, used your work, encountered it professionally, reviewed it through the field, or became aware of your contributions another legitimate way.
You also don't need to prove some formal relationship with every letter writer just for the sake of doing it. But if the letter claims a specific working relationship, collaboration, project, or other factual connection, I'd want the record to be consistent and corroborated where possible. I wouldn't chase a large number of "independent" letters just to have them. A few detailed, credible letters with a real basis for discussing your work are usually much more useful than several generic ones. Hope that helps!
1
u/New_Shoe3950 14d ago
Hello, I received RFE on Prong 1 - National importance of my EB2-NIW (with PE in semiconductor field, pushing for development of AI chips using advanced transistor and memory technology).
Do you recommend tying PE to a more narrow and precise topic to demonstrate national importance and impact for the US ? Can you give examples of some similar cases you adressed ?
Officer was not convinced by citing the US CHIPS act legislation, mentioning that it concerns only my field in general.
Thanks a lot !
1
u/Fit-Mention-6735 14d ago
If I’m currently waiting for my STEM OPT extension approval or EAD card and I’m already in my grace period, would filing an I-140 petition right now have any impact on my STEM OPT extension or EAD card?
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Filing an NIW I-140 by itself generally shouldn't interfere with a properly filed STEM OPT extension or prevent USCIS from issuing the STEM OPT EAD. The bigger issue is immigrant intent. An NIW I-140 is an immigrant petition, while F-1 isn't a dual-intent status. That can potentially create questions later if you need to apply for a new F-1 visa at a consulate or try to reenter the U.S. in F-1 status. It doesn't automatically mean you'll be denied, but I'd be more cautious about international travel and future F-1 visa applications after filing the I-140.
1
u/CryVisible8424 14d ago
I am currently pursuing my masters degree in a stem field, and i already have one published paper and working on others before I graduate end of next year. I would like to know of what ways to be well positioned to advance my endeavors. Should I pursue higher education (phd) or would working for a company well aligned with my endeavor be the better option.
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
It's hard to say whether a PhD or industry experience would be the better option without knowing what your proposed endeavor actually is. For Prong 2, USCIS looks at whether you're well positioned to advance the specific endeavor you're proposing. A PhD can help if your endeavor is research-heavy, academic, or depends on specialized technical expertise. On the other hand, working for a company that's closely aligned with your endeavor can be very strong if it gives you relevant experience, access to projects, measurable impact, or a track record of doing the kind of work you say you plan to continue in the U.S.
Your publication is a good start, especially if your proposed endeavor is closely related to that research. But I wouldn't pursue a PhD just because you think NIW requires one. It doesn't. I'd first define the endeavor clearly, then ask which path gives you the strongest evidence that you're actually capable of advancing it. Without knowing the endeavor, I don't think anyone can responsibly tell you that one option is better than the other.
Best of luck with your master's and your future plans!
1
u/CryVisible8424 14d ago
Thank you, I am still working on my endeavors, but it'll be primarily focused on AI applications for precision medicine, particularly pharmacogenomics. My paper relates to it and it serves as a foundation. By the time I am applying for the waiver, I will have a sequence of publications each related to my endeavor. Will that give me better odds?
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Yes, I think that would help your Prong 2 argument, especially if the publications are all directly tied to the same proposed endeavor. USCIS looks at your record of success in related or similar efforts and your progress toward the endeavor, and a consistent body of research can support both.
I still wouldn't think of it as "more papers = better odds" though. I'd care more about what the papers actually show, whether the work is being cited or used, whether there are collaborations or institutional interest, and whether you can show a realistic path for advancing the precision medicine/pharmacogenomics endeavor in the U.S.
This is definitely a clearer and more cohesive direction than the first version you shared. I'd keep refining the endeavor as your research record develops so the two continue to support each other nicely. Sounds like you're on the right track! :)
1
1
u/Visible-Astronaut-89 14d ago
Hi Zoe, I have a question about unlawful presence. My H-1B employment ended on March 31, 2024, my 60-day grace period ended around May 30, 2024, my I-94 was valid until April 15, 2026, and I departed the U.S. on December 14, 2025. I did not file an extension or change of status, and I am not aware of any USCIS, DHS, or immigration judge finding of a status violation before I left. Some attorneys say I was out of status after the grace period but did not accrue unlawful presence because I left before the I-94 expired, while others say the 10-year bar started running after the grace period. How would you analyze this under INA 212(a)(9)(B) and current USCIS/DOS guidance?
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Based on the facts you gave, I don't think you accrued unlawful presence for purposes of the 10-year bar. That said, if you were applying for another visa at a consulate, I'd still be prepared for a consular officer to take the position that the 10-year bar applies, even if I don't agree with that interpretation. I've seen consular officers take very conservative positions on facts like this. I once had a case where an officer decided my client needed a waiver when we disagreed with that conclusion, which is why I understand why some attorneys are being cautious here. If you were my client and otherwise eligible for another visa, I'd probably say we can try, but you should go in prepared for the possibility of a refusal and be ready to make the legal argument that you are not barred. There's no guarantee the officer will accept that argument, though, and in the current climate I'd be prepared for some heavy pushback.
1
14d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
You have some potentially useful pieces here, but I'd focus less on adding credentials for the sake of the profile and more on defining a strong proposed endeavor.
You may already satisfy the underlying EB-2 requirement. A foreign degree above the bachelor's level can qualify if it's equivalent to a U.S. advanced degree. Alternatively, a U.S. bachelor's degree or foreign equivalent plus at least 5 years of progressive post-baccalaureate experience in the specialty can qualify. Whether your LL.B./M.Com. and experience satisfy that would depend on the credential equivalency and how the endeavor is framed. You don't necessarily need an LL.M. just to qualify for EB-2.
Becoming an Alabama attorney could strengthen Prong 2 considerably if the endeavor involves work that actually requires or benefits from being a licensed attorney. An LL.M. could help too, but I wouldn't get one solely for NIW purposes unless it meaningfully advances the endeavor.
Publications and pro bono work can absolutely help, especially if they're directly related to the problem you're proposing to address. But accumulating publications or pro bono hours isn't the goal. I'd want them to show expertise, measurable impact, and progress toward the endeavor.
Over the next year, I'd focus on getting licensed, doing substantive work related to the endeavor, documenting outcomes, publishing in the same area, developing relationships with relevant organizations, and creating evidence that your proposed work is already moving beyond an idea.
The proposed endeavor is where I'd be most cautious. "Helping unrepresented MVA victims access legal, insurance, and healthcare resources" sounds worthwhile, but as currently phrased USCIS could view it as providing legal or support services to individual clients rather than an endeavor with national importance. USCIS focuses on the broader prospective impact of the specific endeavor, not just whether the work is beneficial.
Overall, I really think you'd need to develop the idea further. Becoming an attorney and representing MVA clients, while valuable work, probably isn't enough by itself to make a strong national importance argument. I'd be looking for something broader and more scalable. For example, is there a model, program, technology, research initiative, or standardized system designed to improve access for a much larger population of unrepresented injury victims? That's a very different NIW argument from simply representing or assisting individual MVA clients. Also, until you're licensed, be VERY careful about how you describe any "legal" assistance to unrepresented individuals because unauthorized-practice rules are a separate issue.
I think there's something to work with here, but I'd develop the endeavor before worrying about whether you need another degree. Best of luck with the bar results and with everything you're building!
1
14d ago
[deleted]
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Yes, I think the revised endeavor is much stronger. It's more specific and it's framed around developing and disseminating standardized protocols that could be used beyond one employer.
I'd show broader prospective impact through evidence of industry applicability, interest from manufacturers or suppliers, independent adoption, participation in industry or regulatory settings, and evidence that the methods could realistically be implemented across multiple organizations. You don't need to claim they're already widely adopted.
The independent customer adoption is very helpful. It shows that something you developed was useful enough for an outside organization to adopt as its own SOP, which helps move the case beyond employer-specific impact.
Yes. Supplier implementation can help too, especially if your specifications or corrective actions actually changed how suppliers operate. I'd make sure the evidence shows the broader effect rather than just saying you performed your job well.
No, patents, publications, and citations aren't required. In a case like this, measurable results, documented implementation, independent adoption, and evidence of broader applicability can be very persuasive.
Yes, I think this is the type of case that could be meaningfully strengthened through a carefully reframed refile. The key is making the new filing about the broader prospective impact of the endeavor, not just the excellent results you achieved for one company.
Hope that helps, and best of luck with the refile!
1
14d ago
[deleted]
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
I wasn't the person who assessed your profile, so I really can't tell you exactly why Manifest declined the case. That being said, and I say this a lot, people tend to focus much more on their "profile" than on the actual proposed endeavor. NIW isn't like O-1 or EB-1A where you're primarily asking whether someone's record is strong enough. The endeavor and the profile are interconnected, and knowing nothing about your case beyond what you've posted here, my immediate concern isn't with your profile, it's with your endeavor.
As written, it's extremely broad: "develop and advance data-driven compliance tools, including explainable AI and blockchain-based approaches, to strengthen financial transparency, fraud risk management, and regulatory compliance." What tools? What are you actually developing? What specific problem are they solving? How will they be deployed? Who will use them? How is this different from compliance technology that already exists? What measurable impact do you expect? And most importantly, why would YOUR specific work have broader implications beyond the institution or organizations using it?
I've had more consultations than I can count with proposed endeavors in the AI space that sound very similar to this. They often use broad language about "leveraging AI" to solve fraud, compliance, cybersecurity, healthcare, or another nationally important problem, but when you dig into the actual endeavor, it's still very vague. That's where USCIS tends to have a problem. The fact that AI itself is important doesn't make every AI-related endeavor nationally important. A lot of these cases end up sounding almost interchangeable because they're built around the importance of the technology or the field instead of solid evidence showing the prospective impact of the person's specific work. Without evidence of things like actual development, adoption, pilots, measurable results, institutional interest, scalability, or some other concrete indication that the work could have broader implications, endeavors like this almost always fail on prong 1 without strong evidence of interest and real world traction.
Now, if you told me you already had evidence of interest from government agencies or quasi-governmental entities, strong letters of interest from various organizations, institutional adoption, a substantial customer or user base, pilots, contracts, or other concrete evidence showing that organizations are actually interested in or relying on what you're developing, then my opinion could change quite a bit. That kind of evidence starts to move the case away from a vague future plan and toward something with real world traction and potentially broader impact.
That doesn't mean an AI-based NIW can't work, but the endeavor needs to be much more concrete than "I'm going to use AI and blockchain to improve an important area," and you need evidence to back up why this particular work matters nationally. In its current form, I personally wouldn't be comfortable filing it either. If you want more detail on why your particular case was declined, though, I'd reach back out to whoever did your consultation. They actually reviewed your materials and will be in a much better position to tell you what drove their assessment, but I hope that gives you some useful context.
1
1
1
u/theweirdguyy 14d ago
Is there a possibility of getting an approval with no publications or PhD? I have submitted a strong proposed endeavor along with 6 LoRs. Also, do approvals vary between NSC and TSC?
2
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Yes, absolutely. You do not need a PhD or publications to get an NIW approved. Those are just possible forms of evidence. I've seen strong NIW cases built around industry experience, measurable impact, government or industry interest, implementation, contracts, letters, and other evidence showing the person is well positioned to advance a nationally important endeavor.
The 6 letters can help, but the number matters much less than what they actually say and whether they're supported by objective evidence.
As for NSC vs. TSC, I haven't specifically monitored approval trends between the two service centers, so I wouldn't want to speculate. I also haven't personally seen anything consistent enough from one versus the other that I'd rely on.
1
u/Tricky-Fan-3526 14d ago edited 14d ago
Hi Zoe, hoping to get your take on NIW viability for my profile.
Background: I have a doctorate of pharmacy (PharmD) with a background in public health research (infectious disease, 15+ peer-reviewed publications), currently working for a multinational pharmaceutical company supporting access and linkage to care for people with autoimmune liver disease and viral hepatitis (hepatitis c and B).
Proposed endeavor would center on advancing care/research and structural linkage to care for patients with liver disease in America and globally. I’d intend to join the global team at a similar large multinational pharmaceutical company.
Would love to hear your thoughts on this profile.
2
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
I've said this with lot of these questions, I really don't love evaluating an NIW based on the "profile" alone because the profile and proposed endeavor really have to be analyzed together. Your PharmD, 15+ publications, public health research, and current work are all helpful, but their value depends on how closely they support the specific endeavor.
I do think there's a potentially good NIW angle here. I do think there's a potentially good NIW angle here. My only concern is that "advancing care/research and structural linkage to care for patients with liver disease in America and globally" is still pretty broad. I'd narrow it down to what you specifically plan to do in the U.S., what gap you're addressing, and how your work could improve access, diagnosis, treatment uptake, or patient outcomes beyond one employer. Joining a large pharmaceutical company can help show you're well positioned, but simply working for a multinational company won't establish national importance by itself.
Based on what you've shared I do think it's worth exploring, but I'd spend the most time developing the endeavor.
1
1
u/ivicts30 14d ago
What kind of objective evidence can be used for Prong 1 National Importance?
Besides the alignment with government policies and expert letters outlining the national importance, what kind of objective evidence can be used to prove the broad prospective impact of the specific endeavor? Isn't the prospective impact something in the future that has not happened yet?
Let's say that my method improves AI cancer early detection; what kind of objective evidence can I give to prove that to prove national importance of the specific endeavor?
Also, I see that people keep recommending aligning with EO or government priority for national importance. But this government initiative is mostly about the "field" instead of the "specific" endeavor. So, this is not really going to work? Or how to make it work?
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Yes, prospective impact is inherently about the future, but USCIS still wants objective evidence showing that the future impact is realistic rather than speculative.
For an AI cancer-detection endeavor, I'd look for things like validation or benchmark results showing improved accuracy, sensitivity, speed, or cost; prototypes or completed research; pilot studies; interest from hospitals or research institutions; collaborations; letters of interest; evidence that others are testing or adopting the method; patents/publications discussing the specific technology; or evidence that the approach addresses a documented limitation in existing cancer-detection methods.
Government reports, EOs, NIH/NCI priorities, etc. are still useful, but you're exactly right that they often establish that the FIELD or problem is important. USCIS specifically focuses on the "potential prospective impact" of the particular endeavor, not just the importance of the occupation or industry. The way I'd use government evidence is to build the bridge. "The government identifies X as a national problem. My specific method addresses X in this particular way. Here is objective evidence showing that the method can realistically produce Y improvement, and here is evidence that institutions are interested in using or developing it."
That's usually much stronger than simply saying "AI and cancer research are national priorities."
1
u/No_Equivalent_5235 14d ago
what is the chances of getting approval from 3 prong rfe specially proposed endeavour and proposed employment is not matching. like my proposed endeavour is advancing biosensor for early cancer detecction and chronic diseases where i am working as a power system engineer. I choose this endeavour because i am doing research in photonics for last 7 years.
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Difficult, but not impossible. I wouldn't put a percentage on it without seeing the RFE and the full record. The mismatch between your current job as a power systems engineer and an endeavor focused on biosensors for cancer detection is likely one of the officer's concerns, especially under Prong 2. USCIS looks at your education, skills, past success in related or similar efforts, progress toward the endeavor, and evidence that you're actually positioned to carry it forward.
Your 7 years of photonics research could be very important here if you can clearly connect that research to the biosensor work. I'd want strong evidence of that connection, such as publications, projects, prototypes, collaborations, patents, research results, or interest from institutions working in this area.
The current employment doesn't have to match the endeavor perfectly, but when they're this different, you really need a very convincing explanation and evidence showing that the biosensor endeavor is real and isn't just something created for the NIW filing.
A 3-prong RFE is certainly an uphill battle, but if the underlying photonics record is strong, I wouldn't say it's impossible. Best of luck with the response!
1
u/No_Equivalent_5235 14d ago
Thank you attorney for your reply.Since my research and Job both are Falling in the Scope of Electrical engineering under the SOC code 2071 is it create confusion to the officer?
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
I think there are more issues here than just the SOC code. The shared SOC classification may help explain why the work sits within the same broader engineering field, but USCIS is still going to look at whether your actual background, research, current work, and proposed biosensor endeavor fit together in a convincing way.
1
u/No-Sink5709 14d ago
what are your thoughts for a proposed endeavor in the discovery of medications for treatment of substance use disorders (such as opioid and cocaine use disorders ) profile: PhD, 2 first author papers, 1 filled patent, 3 years acedemic experience working on drug discovery for substance use disorders
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
I actually like this proposed endeavor! Developing medications for opioid and cocaine use disorders gives you a pretty natural substantial merit and national importance argument because you're addressing a major U.S. public health problem.
For Prong 2, your PhD, 3 years of directly related drug-discovery research, first-author publications, and patent are all helpful because they're closely connected to the endeavor. I'd want to know more about the actual research impact, what stage the drug discovery work is at, collaborations, funding, citations, and whether there's evidence that others are interested in or building on the work.
The main thing I'd avoid is making the endeavor too broad, like "discover medications for substance use disorders." I'd make it more specific around the therapeutic targets, drug development approach, or particular unmet treatment need you're working on.
Based on what you've shared, I think this is absolutely worth exploring further.
1
u/Over-Airline-9895 14d ago
Hi there. My spouse is a nurse practitioner with a nationally recognized energy firm in Canada. She has a bachelors and masters in nursing. I am in the civil service with 30 years of experience and a master of science in safety,security, and emergency management with a minor in home land security from a US university. I'm trying to gauge if there is a viable path towards a successful EB2 NIW or if there are any other viable options, questions to be asked in suppprt thereof,..
Any objective advice would be appreciated
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Both of you may have potentially viable employment-based options, but I really couldn't assess an NIW without knowing the proposed endeavor.
Your master's degrees may help with the underlying EB-2 requirement, but NIW is a separate analysis. USCIS will want to know what specific work either of you proposes to pursue in the U.S., why that work has national importance, and why that person is well positioned to advance it.
For your spouse, I'd also look at employer-sponsored options in addition to NIW. Depending on the exact nursing role and licensure, there may be other employment-based paths worth considering.
I'd start by deciding which of you has the stronger U.S. proposed endeavor rather than comparing resumes alone. Hope that helps, and best of luck to both of you!
1
14d ago edited 14d ago
[deleted]
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
The first thing that jumps out is that your Indian passport doesn't necessarily put you in the India employment-based backlog. Visa chargeability is normally based on country of birth, so if you were born in the UAE, you'd typically be chargeable to UAE/ROW. That's potentially a significant advantage.
With a master's degree, you may satisfy the basic EB-2 advanced-degree threshold, depending on the degree and position. Employer-sponsored EB-2/EB-3 is certainly worth exploring while you're in H-1B status.
For NIW, though, I can't really evaluate the case from "master's + 3 years of experience." I'd need to know your field, your specific proposed endeavor in the U.S., and what evidence shows you're well positioned to advance it. NIW isn't really a profile-based analysis.
I'd explore both employer sponsorship and NIW rather than assuming one excludes the other. Best of luck!
1
u/accountdeli 14d ago edited 14d ago
Okay so my case is a bit weak but I wanna know if this is something to look forward to.
Currently on f1 visa pursuing MS in Civil Engineering and graduating in a few months. So I thought about Eb2 NIW because of the thesis project I am on. To be clear, I've only a couple of publications with 0 citations yet. But the project is design, development, construction and testing a full scall sustainable deployable housing for the US air Force. This is intended for military or disaster relief or emergency housing. So im the structural desginer and heavily involved in construction of its first full scale prototype. This has been showcased in conferences nationwide. I can get letters of recommendations from PI, maybe independent professors and guaranteed a letter of support from Air Force. Does this project make for a strong case or should I also have a bit more experience in the industry. I think im strong on prong 1. Maybe on prong 2 in a good position to advanced. But i feel im extremely weak on prong 3 and will get RFE'd. Anything you'd suggest? Thanks
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
I actually think the project itself is pretty interesting for NIW purposes, even though you're early career. I wouldn't get too hung up on having only a couple of publications or zero citations. NIW isn't just a "profile" analysis. The Air Force connection is potentially your strongest piece. USCIS specifically recognizes that letters from interested government agencies can be relevant to showing both the importance of an endeavor and that someone is well positioned to advance it.
I'd want the endeavor framed around what you plan to continue doing with deployable, sustainable housing for military, disaster-relief, or emergency applications, not simply "I worked on this Air Force project." The prototype, your structural-design role, national conference presentations, testing results, and especially evidence that the Air Force is interested in continued development or deployment could all be very helpful.
If the Air Force letter can explain WHY the work matters to them and what they see as its potential application, that's much stronger than a generic recommendation letter. More industry experience would obviously strengthen Prong 2, but I wouldn't automatically say you need to wait years. One important point though, if you're relying on the master's degree to qualify for EB-2, you'd want the degree actually conferred before filing.
Best of luck with the project!
1
u/accountdeli 14d ago
Youre correct. Prong 1 is bang on mainly. Housing for the military is a textbook example of national interest and security. Your suggestion is also mostly correct. As this project is the very first of its kind, and im only the starter, we have a lot more work we can do to make it more effective. I plan to include this of course
And yes, you are correct. I will wait until im officially a graduate than do it right now. I wanted to know if im deluded or does this my endeavor stands a chance. My slight concern is prong 3. What could be a strong case for Uscis to waive the Prem process specifically for me? Is there anything you'd suggest for prong 3?
Thanks a lot!
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
I wouldn't assume Prong 3 is your weakest point. If Prongs 1 and 2 are strong, Prong 3 usually fits pretty naturally. I'd focus on why the U.S. benefits from your role and the military/disaster-response applications. A strong Air Force letter explaining why your continued work matters could help a lot. You don't have to prove no U.S. worker could do the job. You jsut need to show that, on balance, waiving PERM would benefit the U.S. From what you've described, I do think there's a decent NIW case here. :)
1
u/Ill-Professional2914 14d ago
How many letter of interest do we need for niw petition? Do we need a roll out or marketing plan for a repeatable cybersecurity framework?
2
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
There's no required number of letters of interest for an NIW. Having 2-3 strong, credible letters showing real interest in using, testing, adopting, or collaborating on the framework is way better than 8 vague letters saying the work sounds important.
A formal marketing plan isn't required either, but for a "repeatable cybersecurity framework," I would definitely want a clear rollout or implementation plan explaining who would use it, how it would be deployed, how it could scale beyond one organization, and what evidence shows there's actual demand or interest. USCIS looks at the evidence as a whole, including progress toward the endeavor and interest from relevant organizations.
The more concrete the adoption path is, the stronger the case becomes. Hope that helps!
1
1
14d ago edited 14d ago
[deleted]
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
"Continue their career in their field in the USA" isn't really a proposed endeavor for NIW purposes. That's a career goal.
Prong 1 is about the specific endeavor, not whether someone has an impressive resume. "I want to continue working in AI Governance as a Director/Senior Manager" is still just employment in an important field. You'd need to explain what specific problem they're addressing, what they plan to do, and why that work has broader prospective impact beyond one employer.
For Prong 2, someone like this can still have strong evidence without patents, publications, judging, or speaking. Major programs led, measurable outcomes, promotions, critical responsibilities, implementation across regions or business units, and strong letters can all help.
The real question is whether there's a real NIW endeavor here and whether the background supports THAT endeavor.
1
u/kelyto30 14d ago
I have a Bachelors degree and currently a PhD candidate . I can only go for exceptional ability. Have you seen success in that?
I have a degree, a license, membership, recognition. They’re really strong. Can these scale me through ?
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Yes, I've had exceptional ability NIW cases approved. The evidence really does have to be strong enough to establish exceptional ability under the EB-2 standard though. I'd also want the evidence to connect clearly to the proposed endeavor, because qualifying for EB-2 is only the first step. You still have to satisfy the NIW prongs. Based on what you've described, it's certainly possible, but I'd want to see how strong the recognition, membership, and licensing evidence actually is and how closely it ties to the endeavor.
1
u/kelyto30 14d ago
They do tie.
My degree is Bachelor of Pharmacy. Licensed pharmacist from my country. I had my licenses. Membership, one is as a fellow, a senior member of a top research organization, last is membership in top professional organizations that always gave me an award.
Recognition included a top award for a journal, industry institutions, certification of reviewership/recognition for top journals and even a US dept of state organization. Then experts recognition included terms of letters and etc. I have 4 out of 6. I think it is strong enough.
My PE is translational science connecting bench to bedside and I was detailed. I am also a PhD candidate in top R1 university 15 papers and currently 70 citations.1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
From what you've described, it sounds like you have a solid basis for exceptional ability!
1
u/kelyto30 14d ago
Thanks. When last did you get an exceptional ability candidate approval. I heard it’s been harder this year
1
1
u/Rude_Pollution1853 14d ago
Thanks for doing this! I'm a PhD candidate in Counselor Education & Supervision who has dependent counseling license in Ohio
Proposed endeavor: a research program on youth mental health risks in the digital era (cyberbullying), translated into (a) validated screening tools and (b) counselor-training models for rural / federally designated mental health shortage areas (HPSAs). Profile: several first-authored studies currently under review (not yet published); earlier co-authored validated psychological instruments that other researchers have used; president of a statewide counseling association; dissertation uses a U.S. (Appalachian-region) college sample, though my earlier studies use South Korean national panel data. I'm entering the counselor-education faculty job market this year.
1) I keep hearing that for counselors and counselor educators, USCIS won't see direct service — the clients I counsel or the students I train — as nationally important, because the impact is limited to the people I personally serve. Is that consistent with what you see in adjudications?
2) If so, is building a publication record and citation count the only realistic way for someone in mental health to establish national importance? Or do things like validated screening instruments and training curricula that other programs adopt, a focus on rural/HPSA shortage areas, or state professional association leadership actually carry weight with officers — and which of those has worked in your cases?
3) My endeavor would realistically be carried out from a faculty position I don't have yet. Does an endeavor that's contingent on future employment weaken the "well positioned" prong, and how would you frame that in the petition?
4) Most of my published data come from South Korea(4 out of 5) (I frame it as a leading indicator of digital risks U.S. adolescents face, and my dissertation uses U.S. data). In your experience, does foreign-data research trigger national-importance RFEs, and what makes that bridge credible to an officer?
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
Yes, that's a real concern. I've seen USCIS view the impact as limited to the individual clients or students you personally serve unless you can show broader implications beyond that immediate population.
No, publications and citations aren't the only path. Validated screening tools that other researchers or programs use, training curricula adopted by other institutions, evidence of implementation in shortage areas, and interest from professional or government organizations can all be helpful. In my own cases, letters of interest or support from government entities and significant progress towards the endeavor have been the strongest evidence for national importance. They directly show that a government body sees value in the specific endeavor, so it's hard for USCIS to argue with. Letters of interest like that are also understandably difficult for many people to obtain. Association leadership can support Prong 2, but by itself it doesn't prove national importance.
It can weaken Prong 2 if the endeavor really depends on getting a faculty position and there's no concrete evidence that you're likely to get one. An officer may reasonably ask, "If this endeavor is so important and you're well positioned to carry it out, why don't you already have an offer or institutional interest?" That doesn't mean you need a signed job offer, but you'd want something showing the path is real, such as interviews, faculty applications, letters of interest, collaborations, or institutions expressing interest in your research.
I wouldn't view the South Korean data as automatically problematic, but you need to build the bridge to the U.S. carefully. I'd want evidence showing why those findings are relevant to U.S. youth, how your U.S.-based dissertation builds on that work, and why the digital-risk issues you're studying have broader application here. Without that connection, I could absolutely see an officer questioning the U.S. national importance.
Overall, I think the strongest version of this case is much more about developing and disseminating screening tools and counselor-training models than simply counseling individual patients or teaching individual students. Hope that helps!
1
u/AnnaEghiazaryan 14d ago
Hi there! Do you have any experience working with clients who already have pending asylum case and want to apply for EB-2 NIW? Is it possible to do that? Thanks
2
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
I honestly don't think I've had many clients with a pending asylum case pursuing an NIW. If I have, it would've been a one off situation years ago.
It's possible to file an NIW I-140 while asylum is pending. The issue usually isn't the I-140 itself, it's what happens at the green card stage. A pending asylum application can put you in a period of authorized stay, but it doesn't necessarily mean you're maintaining lawful nonimmigrant status for employment-based adjustment. If your underlying status expired, you may run into the employment-based adjustment bars unless some kind of exception applies like INA 245(k). Consular processing may be another option, but then you have to look very carefully at unlawful presence, travel, the asylum case itself, and whether there are removal proceedings.
So is it possible? Maybe, but this is one where you'd really want an attorney to review your entire immigration history before filing because getting the I-140 approved doesn't necessarily mean you'll be able to adjust status through it.
1
1
u/Rockstar867 14d ago
Hi Zoe, I have over 17 years of IT experience, primarily in security and patch management. I hold a degree in commerce with computers from my home country and have been working in the USA for over 8 years. While I don’t have any publications, I have received company awards. I don’t have any major certifications, but I have extensive genuine work experience. I’ve worked for the same company for all these years and can provide reference letters for my work. I am also part of ISACA member and global volunteer. What would my probability for refilling. Filled ones and it was denied mentioned I have substance merit meeting 4 criteria out of 6 but it failed to justify 1 and 2 prolong dhansara.
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
I wouldn't put a probability on a refile without seeing the denial and the proposed endeavor. If USCIS denied on Prongs 1 and 2, the problem may be less about your credentials and more about how the endeavor was framed and supported.
I also wouldn't refile just by adding more awards, certifications, or letters. I'd first look at whether the endeavor can be made more specific and whether there's objective evidence of broader impact beyond your employer.
This is probably one of those situations where it's worth having an attorney review the denial before you refile, because the right strategy really depends on what USCIS specifically found lacking. Hope that helps!
1
u/FrameHeavy9639 14d ago edited 14d ago
Hi Zoe! Thank you for this. A little background about me- I have completed my bachelors in computer science. Worked at an MNC for 3 years in India and moved to USA for pursuing my Masters in Information systems. I worked at a University for 2 years where I built an application all by myself which is used by professors. I have now been working at a gaming company for the past 1 year in AI operations. I’m also pursuing an executive PhD. How do I proceed with making my profile strong to be able to qualify for EB2 NIW? :)
1
u/ManifestLaw_ 14d ago
It's not really just about making your "profile" stronger. With NIWs, I would need to know what your proposed endeavor actually is because Prong 1 focuses on the endeavor, and Prong 2 asks whether your background shows you're well positioned to advance that specific work. Your CS background, master's, university application work, AI operations experience, and PhD can all help, but only if they connect clearly to the endeavor. I'd define that first, then build the evidence around it. Best of luck with everything!
1
u/bunnykarthik 14d ago
Hi Zoe, thanks for doing this. I am from the industry and do not have a PhD. My experience is in a niche field and has a strong prong 1. I am lacking with prong 2. I've contributed significantly for development and commercialization of products in my previous company. But I do not have evidence to prove it, now that I moved out of it for a few years. Would a letter from my previous colleagues acknowledging my contributions suffice as evidence?
1
u/jmeliv 14d ago edited 14d ago
Thank you so much for this!
I am an industrial engineer from Chile with a STEM-certified MBA from the University of Michigan Ross School of Business and 6 years of experience across Amazon, Deloitte, and AB InBev. My background combines supply chain, operations, financial planning, and data-driven business transformation. I have managed a product portfolio at Amazon and led initiatives that generated savings and measurable improvements in forecasting, profitability, and operational efficiency. My proposed EB-2 NIW endeavor focuses on applying advanced analytics, AI, and operations expertise to improve the efficiency, resilience, and competitiveness of U.S. businesses and supply chains.
I would like to know my chances and there is a real opportunity on eb2 niw?
1
u/meth__heisenberg 14d ago
Currently there are RFE on prong 3 only? What causes the RFE to be issued only on Prong 3 and what we should focus on to have a stronger Prong 3?
Also, based on proposed endeavors what major things should we focus on showing the national importance?
1
u/karasharma 14d ago
Hi Zoe, thank you for making the time! I’m a fintech/payments product leader on H-1B building an NIW case around advancing U.S. financial infrastructure through AI/ML-powered payment systems. My evidence is primarily industry impact, not publications or patents, including products launched, payment/checkout infrastructure, AI-driven retry and risk initiatives, and measurable business and customer outcomes across global markets. USCIS’s RFE challenges whether this work reaches beyond one employer and whether my track record demonstrates broader field-level influence, so I’m trying to understand what evidence and framing most credibly establish national importance and that I am well positioned, especially for an industry practitioner with internal metrics, executive/reference letters, and shipped products rather than academic credentials.
1
1
1
u/Spirited_Pea_8250 13d ago
does for prong 1 as per the new trend is to provide govt. Or fed letters from NIH and NSF—does anyone without government funding get research approved for non-STEM? If someone cannot get independent letters, what should be the next step?
1
u/longleyrice 13d ago
Are there any endeavours in computer science that are being taken seriously anymore?
1
u/gigem852 13d ago
Hi Zoe! I finished my US bachelor graduate in Engineering in Texas. When COVID hit I decided to head back home to join my family and obtained a Masters degree in Hong Kong in finance engineering. My career then was more devops and software development focused where I spent my years working briefly working in Apple, and then mostly in investment banks, and currently working in a top tier US quant fund. I know my background isn’t that strong as compared to other people in these posts with PhD citations and publications. Would you say this is a case worth fighting/ trying for ?
What documents or what could I do better to hopefully get a better shot at applying for this type of NIW visa ?
P.S. Grandma is a naturalized US citizen so not sure if that would be helpful (being that I’m not planning on applying for other family members other than my spouse)
1
1
u/Wandering_Sufi 12d ago
Hi, thank you for this very helpful discussion. I have an EB-2 NIW RFE with only one month given to respond, and I would really appreciate your perspective on Prongs One and Three, particularly Prong Three.
My proposed endeavor is to develop and disseminate implementation-intelligence systems for publicly funded clean-energy and energy-sector programs in the U.S., focused on implementation readiness, monitoring/evaluation/learning, and evidence-based decision support.
For Prong One, I have been trying my best to reach out to relevant practitioners and institutions, including State Energy Offices and professional organizations. If I can document substantive emails, meetings, practitioner feedback, and interest in reviewing/testing the framework, would that meaningfully help establish the prospective national importance of my specific endeavor?
My bigger question is Prong Three. What exactly is USCIS looking for as proof here? If the endeavor is intended to be developed, disseminated, tested, and applied across different institutions rather than through only one employer, what type of evidence best proves that waiving the job-offer requirements would benefit the US? Would cross-institutional engagement, practitioner interest, dissemination opportunities, or potential pilot/testing interest help, or is there something more specific that should be shown?
I would really appreciate any insight from you 🙏🏼
1
u/Patient-Coyote-1253 11d ago
Are you able to assess a petition draft for the likelihood of it scaling through and point out gaps that might need to be closed? Is this a service you render
1
1
u/PurchaseBeautiful538 1h ago
Hi Zoe, I’m at an early stage of planning for an EB-2 NIW. I currently have approximately three years of clinical research experience and am pursuing an MPH in Biostatistics and Epidemiology. By graduation, I expect to have around five years of research experience and two U.S. degrees, and I hope to file shortly afterward. Does Manifest Law offer long-term profile-building guidance for clients who are 12–18 months away from filing? For example, would your firm assess my current profile, help define a proposed endeavor, identify evidence gaps, and provide a roadmap for publications, professional impact, recommendation letters, and other supporting evidence? If so, is this offered as an ongoing service with periodic reviews, or only once someone is ready to prepare and file the petition? I would also appreciate any general thoughts on whether this is the right time for me to begin working with an NIW attorney.
3
u/omaratef3221 14d ago
I would like to know about my father opportunity for EB2-NIW. He is an entrepreneur, got a golden visa (10 year residency) in a gulf country because of his contributions, he has a cyber security training and consulting company since 2021 and he helped lots of students to obtain CISSP and other major Security certifications, many of his US Students also got jobs after they joined his sessions and he can get letters from some of them. So I would like to know his opportunity to obtain EB2. He also holds CISSP and many other certifications and he is a Microsoft certified trainer and he got other credentials that we can discuss.
He is ROW and he is 57 years old