Sample Cases from our office

These are some sample cases from our files. It is impossible for us to highlight all we have done in the past thirty years of our practice. These are just some of the cases that come to mind.

We won an EB-1 Outstanding Researcher case for an applicant with a Ph.D. in Experimental Chemical Physics filing under Premium Processing. The case was decided within two days of submission.  The applicant had over eleven years of research experience and an abundance of publications as a result of his extensive list of original findings. As a result of the multitude of publications in prestigious, international scientific journals, the applicant’s work was also extensively cited. We provided copies of the articles along with the data regarding the significance of the journals, which included printouts from Google Scholar and the ISI master journal list. We provided documentary evidence on each of the journals to show the reputation in the field. We also provided copies of the cited work, highlighting the citations as well as the reference section. As a result of the extensive publication list, we were also able to provide documentary evidence to reflect the significance of his “original” scientific contributions to the field.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

-----------------------

We have won a case for a Ph.D. in Immunology for EB1, Outstanding Researcher following an elaborate Request for Evidence. The applicant had extensive research experience in the following areas:  Pathology, Biochemistry, Molecular Biology and Immunology.  USCIS requested additional documentary evidence to support the initial evidence that the applicant qualified based on his acting as judge of others’ work, numerous publications with accompanying citations as well as substantial evidence of “original” scientific contributions. We offered additional supporting documents that included letters from prominent military officials noting requests for applicant to review proposals, elaborate details on the significance and impact of the journals where the applicant’s research work had been published as well as documentary evidence to support the international reputation the applicant had gained as reflected by the multitude of citations in prominent scientific journals in his field. We provided evidence to confirm that the applicant’s ongoing noteworthy research was based on his “original” scientific contributions and that his work had a significant impact on the overall health and well-being of not only the U.S. military personnel but also the citizens of the country.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

-----------------------

We won a case for a Ph.D. in Remote Sensing and Geographic Information Systems – Geomatic Engineering.  He had over eight years of teaching experience and ten years of research experience.  His unique background landed him a position abroad as a critical member of a high-level research team. We provided documentary evidence to show the applicant’s qualifications, which included publications, media articles, citations and letters of invitation to present his innovative work.  The applicant had extensive evidence to show the impact of his contributions to his field.  Evidence covered a lengthy period of time reflecting the years of highly specialized training and experience gained by the applicant. We submitted letters of recommendation from high-ranking officials who had formerly worked with the applicant on various projects. We also showed that his expertise was world-renowned and thus was invited as a guest editor for a prestigious scientific journal.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

-----------------------

We won a case for a Ph.D. in Organic Chemistry as an Outstanding Researcher. This applicant had over 22 years of research experience in the field and was a noted expert. We submitted documentary evidence to show his multiple patents and the commercialization of his patented work. We also provided extensive documentation to show his significant publication record and the multitude of citations resulting from his innovative and pioneering work. This applicant also qualified as a reviewer for several international scientific journals. It was noted in his reference letters that due to his high level of expertise, he was considered one of the best in his field, and consequently was invited on numerous occasions to evaluate manuscripts for publication. We claimed qualification in 3 components of the category: publications, contributions and judge of others work.

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

-----------------------

We won a case for a surgeon who had over 31 years of research, teaching and surgical experience. This applicant was highly qualified and known in the field to be one of the few that have reached the highest level of success. He was very well published with over 90 publications and authorship of a multitude of book chapters. We provided extensive documentary evidence to show that he was one of the premier surgeons in his expertise. This applicant was frequently called upon as an invited speaker and presented his work worldwide. We also provided evidence to show his extensive contributions to the field, which included numerous patents, technical guidebooks, and several book chapters. He also qualified to judge the work of others as a session chair, committee member, conference organizer, journal reviewer, and thesis examiner. He also was a member of several prestigious professional societies, which required nomination for membership.  

DISCLAIMER: PAST APPROVAL OF A CASE IS NOT A GUARANTEE OR PREDICTION REGARDING THE OUTCOME OF FUTURE CASES. CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE.

-----------------------