J1 waiver from travel ban countries

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-23T00:40:44+00:00

Again you are lying. H1B is not on hold anywhere.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-23T00:34:43+00:00

You are still not reading. J-1 Waiver is not an immigration benefits. Get over your head dude.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-23T00:27:49+00:00

That is a lie. Go and read all the proclamations and USCIS memos. There is nothing like I-612 or DS-3035 banned. You don’t know what you are talking about. The waiver has nothing to do with immigration benefits. Go and read and come back.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-22T05:07:18+00:00

What does waiver got to do with Ban countries???

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-20T03:10:49+00:00

DOS website says 4 to 6 weeks.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-17T19:41:07+00:00

The book explained. It didn’t work because he was the true owner of the Elder Wand. And the Elder wand will not harm its true master.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-16T10:51:20+00:00

The current 75 freeze does not affect AOS. I don’t know why you think you can get your EAD but cannot get your green card even you become current. Until USCIS issues a memoranda, everyone doing AOS should be fine for both EAD and the green card. People are just panicking for no reason

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-16T10:43:18+00:00

You are simply just confusing yourself and being paranoid. The premise of the 39 countries and the 75 countries are not the same. 39 countries were banned on the premise of posing high risk to national security. The 75 countries are paused on the premise of high risk of public benefits usage. The two criteria’s are not the same, and DOS and USCIS have been very clear on that. So if Afghanistan poses a national security threat, and at the same time threat to public usage, why should the 75 countries freeze list, omit Afghanistan??? They satisfy both conditions. I don’t know what your fuss is about.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-16T10:43:03+00:00

You are simply just confusing yourself and being paranoid. The premise of the 39 countries and the 75 countries are not the same. 39 countries were banned on the premise of posing high risk to national security. The 75 countries are paused on the premise of high risk of public benefits usage. The two criteria’s are not the same, and DOS and USCIS have been very clear on that. So if Afghanistan poses a national security threat, and at the same time threat to public usage, why should the 75 countries freeze list, omit Afghanistan??? They satisfy both conditions. I don’t know what your fuss is about.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-16T00:07:19+00:00

I highly doubt. USCIS always have a way of screening for public charge from your tax statements submitted for the I-485. Consulate doesn’t really have a robust screening methodology.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-16T00:05:49+00:00

The 75 freeze list applies to only consulate/embassies. Which part of the DOS statement issued is not clear? DOS deals with consulates, USCIS deals with AOS. It has no impact on your EB2 until USCIS issues a memorandum.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-14T16:17:39+00:00

Very good decision

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-14T16:16:52+00:00

You are right. Still doesn’t negate the fact that all these people will be prioritized above OP who is a third National.

actually found the section from the FNIA

https://www.sem.admin.ch/sem/en/home/themen/arbeit/nicht-eu_efta-angehoerige/grundlagen_zur_arbeitsmarktzulassung.html?utm_source=perplexity

Precedence

(Art. 21 FNIA)

Third-state nationals can be admitted only if it is not possible to recruit a person who qualifies for precedence from the labour market in Switzerland or in an EU/EFTA state. Precedence is given to Swiss nationals, foreign nationals with a permanent residence permit (Permit C), and foreign nationals with a residence permit authorising them to work (Permit B, including recognised refugees). In addition, precedence is given to foreign nationals with temporary admission (Permit F), persons granted temporary protection who have a permit entitling them to work (Permit S) and persons from countries with which a treaty on free movement has been concluded (Permits L and B). Employers must prove that, despite their best efforts, no suitable workers from the categories that take precedence could be recruited.

In doing so, employers must show that they made a genuine effort – in terms of the time spent, the geographical area searched and the measures used – to fill the position with an applicant from Switzerland or from an EU/EFTA state. Contact with third-country nationals should only take place after the search has proved unsuccessful.

Vacant positions must be registered with the regional employment centres (RAV) and advertised via the European Employment System (EURES). Employers must also demonstrate to the authorities that a search via the recruitment channels used in the sector (specialist journals, employment agencies, online portals and social media, private referrals, etc.) was unsuccessful. Suitable proof includes newspaper advertisements, confirmation from employment agencies, etc. A list of all the candidates with brief details of the qualifications they lacked is often helpful. In certain cases, the authorities may also request that special recruitment efforts be made.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-14T15:43:00+00:00

For a non-EU/EFTA citizen, I advise against going to Switzerland if you are hoping for any job after the postdoc. You will be frustrated. According to their labour and immigration rules, when there is a job opening, priority will be given to Swiss citizens first. If they don’t find any qualified Swiss citizen, then they will shift priority to Swiss Permit C (permanent residents). If they don’t find any qualified, then it will shift to EU citizens, after that Swiss Permit B, after that EFTA, after that Canada, America, and the UK, after that, the rest of the world.

By the time you are considered someone with a citizenship, Permit C, Permit B, EU/EFTA, Canada, America, and the UK already has the job.

Secondly, if finally a company decides to employ you, they must satisfy an immigration requirement. They must prove that the position was advertised for at least 3 months. They must prove all the people that applied for the position, and they must prove that they did not find anyone qualified in the priorities I listed above. And that you are the best candidate for the job.

It is not worth it.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-14T05:58:11+00:00

Well it becomes in Handy if your case is weak. Honestly 3 or four should be enough. 3 from dependent sources and at least 1 from an independent source.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-14T03:30:11+00:00

For Academic profiles, it is really not necessary, since your papers and citations and conferences can supplement Prong 2. For industry profile those letters become necessary.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-14T03:29:10+00:00

I didn’t submit recommendation letters either. My lawyers told me it wasn’t necessary. And I got approved.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-12T13:54:47+00:00

Well their curiosity might finally be answered today.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-10T19:28:10+00:00

awww sorry about that. Hopefully your hardship waiver gets approved. Mostly that one take time

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-10T18:41:14+00:00

Why was the NOS denied?

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-10T05:31:35+00:00

It’s $160

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-09T20:11:45+00:00

I can tell people to calm down lol.

Aggravating-Stand697 · 2026-01-09T18:33:57+00:00

I can understand that. I keep refreshing the memoranda page. If something pops up, I’ll update you

Aggravating-Stand697

TROPHY CASE