If I may verify the processing times involved in NIW. Since it falls under EB2 category, I am assuming it may be a long time before I can get my EAD card and be able to change employers. Also, I want to confirm if there could be issues if I change employers during the process - If so, I'd prefer to change my current employer before starting with it.
You can change employers any time if you are a self-applicant and will continue to work in your stated area of national interest. But NIW priority date will take the same time as a normal EB-2 application does. See:
Note: This is a verbatim transcript of the referenced audio/video media delivered as oral communication, and, therefore, may not conform to written grammatical or syntactical form.
We have received an approval for an O-1 for a pharmaceuticals scientist employed by a small company. The case was approved without an RFE where we clearly showed the advanced nature of the work and the qualifications of the beneficiary. The outcome of O-1 visa petitions is always unpredictable, and, as a practical matter, more so where the employer is a very small company. Despite its size, the company was engaged in highly specialized and advanced level work. In addition to the beneficiary’s qualifications, the nature of the work
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.
The Committee of Bar Examiners (Committee) — the entity within the State Bar of California (State Bar) that administers the California bar examination, investigates the qualifications of bar applicants, and certifies to this court candidates it finds qualified for admission to the State Bar — has submitted the name of Sergio C. Garcia (hereafter Garcia or applicant) for admission to the State Bar.
We won a case for National Interest Waiver a Microbiologist holding a Ph.D., 12 publications and over ten years research experience. We were able to provide evidence of a strong national interest through numerous letters of recommendation from leading scientists. This applicant had an international reputation in his field.
We won a case for Alien of Extraordinary Ability in environmental sciences with 9 publications, numerous “invited” committee memberships, a judge of the work of many other leading scientists and considered one of the leading experts in his field. We were able to provide evidence to show that his work was innovative and pioneering.
We won a case for Outstanding Researcher a Cellular and Molecular Biologist with 8 prestigious awards, professional society memberships and multiple letters of recommendation from leading scientists. We were able to provide evidence to show extensive contributions to the field of cancer research.
We won this case for an applicant with five years research experience. The applicant was able to secure a very strong letter from the National Science Foundation director which detailed the innovative and pioneering work of the applicant. It was noted that his skills were critical for an initiative developed by the Foundation. We also offered evidence of his strong Ph.D. work as well as his publication record.
What does the State Department recommend as the best method for an attorney to bring arguments of admissibility to the Post's attention?
The State Department says that an attorney should present a cover letter that summarizes the issue and a legal memo at the time of interview.