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 received notice to come into Baltimore office for EAD 6 days before appointed time. Both were out of town on business on day of appointment, so followed instructions of informing them in writing and requesting new appointment date.
Didn't hear from them for more than 90 days, so made appointment on INFOPASS.
Arrived at 9am, called within 5 minutes to window - showed EAD application filing receipt and told to wait. 2 hours passed,
It was ~92 days since I applied at VSC and so decided to go to Boston for interim EAD.
Came at 6:20AM at entrance. 10 Guys ahead of us and by 7AM 20 guys behind us. Were promptly let in by guard at 7 AM. Was issued a ticket number after standing in line for a brief period. Then waited till 11:30 AM to get my 5 min at the counter. Officer was courteous and simply asked us for the relevant forms. He then gave the approval form to drop off with the person who makes the EAD card who took about 30 min to issue the card.
Myself and my wife applied for EAD on 12/13/2004. I got approved in a week but she did not get approval. So, We took the appointment at Newark, NJ at 7:45 AM on 04/22/2005.
We reached 970 Broad St, Newark ,NJ at 5 AM. No one was there and waited outside of the builing. People started coming after 6:15 AM. By 7:30 AM there were around 40-50 people around.
I would like to share with you an information that you might be able to add to the 'Interim EAD Issuance Policy' section. Yesterday, I went to the Orlando, FL office to get my interim EAD. They told me that I had to mail in my request to their office. What they want really is for us to sent them, by mail, another I-765 application, write INTERIM on top of it, attach the I-765 and I-485 receipt and sent it to them by mail.
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.