Search

 We won this case following a response to a Request for Evidence. Service requested further clarification on the "permanency" of the job offer, which was with a University. We submitted the HR policies/procedures documentation to show that the position was permanent and met the Service requirements. Letters from the HR as well as the Department were submitted to show that the position would continue and that funding was available to support this position.

We won a National Interest Waiver case for a Molecular Biologist holding a Ph.D. having over ten years of research experience. We argued that her qualifications were unique as compared to others in the field and that she was noted as one of the few in her field that has achieved the highest level of success. She had remarkable contributions to the field, most notably her significant discoveries in cardiovascular research. This applicant had an extensive publication list as well as a book chapter.

We won an Outstanding Researcher case for a Research Associate Ph.D. in Instrumentation and Master of Science in Materials Science with over 13 years experience. We argued that with his extensive list of achievements, i.e. 11 refereed journal articles, 7 manuscripts currently under review, 11 publications in conference proceedings, peer reviewing of manuscripts and selection as a doctoral fellow at a world-renowned institute, he more than qualified for the category. This applicant's work was funded and supported by NASA.

We won an Alien of Extraordinary Ability case for a Ph.D. in physics. This applicant had over 13 years of research experience, 30 refereed journal articles, 12 Invited presentations at conferences and meetings, 2 refereed conference publications, peer reviewing of manuscripts for prestigious international journals, employment at several world-renowned institutes and was elected to membership in Sigma Xi, the Scientific Research Society. Clearly, this applicant stood out among his peers as one of the few who has reached the highest level of success in his field.

We won a National Interest Waiver case for an applicant holding an M.D., Ph.D. and MSE in Biomedical Engineering, and a B.Tech. in Electrical Engineering. This applicant had an extraordinary background. His degrees were received from the most prestigious institutes in the world, notably Harvard, MIT and Johns Hopkins University . His pioneering work has lead others in the field to a better understanding of what causes sudden cardiac death through fatal arrhythmias. His work was quoted as "revolutionizing health care."

We won an Outstanding Researcher case following a Request for Evidence, which included a detailed offer of employment request. The applicant had over 13 years research experience, a multitude of scholarly publications in prestigious, international, peer-reviewed journals, numerous requests for reviews and significant contributions to the field of Polymer Science as well as "invitations" to present his innovative research findings.

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.

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 won a case for a Materials Scientist who had over 11 years of research experience. His expertise was in the field of solar and hydrogen powered energy. We provided documentary evidence to show that his extensive list of publications was in prestigious international journals with high impact factors. We also showed that as a result of his innovative and pioneering work, he was invited to present his findings at a large number of conferences/workshops and symposia.

This applicant had over 5 years of industry experience and 8 years of research experience. He was offered a job with a private company conducting antennae and microwave engineering research. His unique skills set him apart from other researchers in the field and as a result he received several significant awards for his outstanding achievement. He also published for the prestigious society, IEEE.

 We won this case following a Request for Evidence, which included requests for further documentary evidence to show that the grant awards received were considered "highly competitive" and awarded based on the applicant's outstanding achievements. We provided documentation to show that the applicant was featured in major media for his innovative work. We provided additional expert letters that reiterated the applicant truly stood out amongst his peers and more than qualified for the category.

To give you folks an idea of what gets through easily. We won a case for a chemist with over 14 years of teaching and research experience. This applicant was the author of over 63 peer-reviewed research publications and presented his work at 17 conferences and symposia. He was also invited to present at a multitude of seminars. This applicant authored 5 book chapters and technical proceedings. He qualified for the category based on his extensive publication record as well as his acting as a judge of others' work.

We won this case following a response to a Request for Evidence. Service requested further clarification on the "permanency" of the job offer, which was with a University. We submitted an official job offer letter as well as the copies of the university personnel manual and administrative handbook. Service had requested additional evidence to show "international reputation" of the applicant.