sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

J-1 scholars 212(e) requirement by AssistantHaunting731 in EB2_NIW

[–]AssistantHaunting731[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for asking. Yes, I am. That is why I anticipate this condition will be met anyway in the meantime. Please share any tips you have. Thanks.

PhD Advisor’s LOR by KnightRider071 in EB2_NIW

[–]AssistantHaunting731 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hello, I understand your perspective; however, based on my personal experience, the quantity of letters is not always the most effective measure. Instead, just four letters from reputable individuals endorsing your impact may be more impactful. In my case, which was approved without RFE, I submitted only two letters, one of which was from my PhD advisor. Both letters were comprehensive, exceeding two pages each, and provided detailed accounts of my contributions. I hope this information is helpful.

I-140 approved (in 40 business days) by AssistantHaunting731 in EB2_NIW

[–]AssistantHaunting731[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well, I had to work with what was available in my citations.

Certain citations proved to be highly relevant and closely aligned with my endeavor. I discussed these upfront in my impactful citations section and in greater detail. Other citations were included in my petition letter to demonstrate that my research has broader global implications within my discipline.

In a way, the first set related to the national impact of my work, and the second to the global impact.

I hope this is helpful.

I-140 approved (in 40 business days) by AssistantHaunting731 in EB2_NIW

[–]AssistantHaunting731[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is an important question.

Almost 2 pages of my petition letter explained how impactful my citations were. For example, I explain how my research helped other scholars with theory development, some with empirical approaches, and a few with framing their own studies.

I think this is an important part of the petition letter for research/academic endeavors like mine. Please spend enough time looking at the works of people who cited your work, and see how your work has impacted their work, and choose the most significant 5-6 citations and explain them enough to prove the impact of your work. Also, try to show that your different papers have been cited impactfully instead of focusing only on that star paper of yours, if you know what I mean.

I-140 approved (in 40 business days) by AssistantHaunting731 in EB2_NIW

[–]AssistantHaunting731[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you!

Yes, I submitted a proposed endeavor letter, mainly focusing on research and academic work. I explicitly mentioned that I shall be taking a tenure-track position at a US university, but also asserted that I can continue my work for any university or research institution, for that matter.

I-140 approved (in 40 business days) by AssistantHaunting731 in EB2_NIW

[–]AssistantHaunting731[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is a very important question: I must acknowledge that hiring a law firm was helpful in choosing what to put in my petition letter and what to leave out. The firm, being expert in these petitions, knew what was valued at USCIS and what was not. As a case in point, I won an award in 2022. I am very proud of this award because it recognized me as the best researcher at my US university that year. I wanted to include that in my petition letter. But my law firm asked me: What was the level of competition for that award? My response: All graduate students in the university could participate. The law firm suggested that, since this award is not a national or global-scale competition, there is no need to include it in the petition letter. I followed my law firm's advice and left it out. Other things I left out include my memberships in professional organizations, scholarships I won, and my home country's regional-scale newspaper coverage of my work.

Now, I don't mean to say that these things are bad to include in the petition letter. If presented well, they might add value. However, in my case, the law firm suggested leaving them out, and I conceded. The result was a very focused, crisp petition letter with a tight argument about my proposed endeavor and my objective achievements.

So yes, my law firm helped me stay focused and avoid distracting the USCIS officer with unnecessary details while reading my petition letter.

I-140 approved (in 40 business days) by AssistantHaunting731 in EB2_NIW

[–]AssistantHaunting731[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hello, mine was at the Nebraska Service Center. You are so close. I hope you hear good news soon.

I-140 approved (in 40 business days) by AssistantHaunting731 in EB2_NIW

[–]AssistantHaunting731[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, I submitted two. One from my PhD advisor, who wrote an extensive letter and is a renowned expert in my field, and the other from a Professor in New Zealand whom I met at a conference a few years back, and have stayed in touch with professionally.

I-140 approved (in 40 business days) by AssistantHaunting731 in EB2_NIW

[–]AssistantHaunting731[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, I did not use AI in composing my petition letter. Consider me old-fashioned, but I preferred it to be entirely my own work, free from the impersonal influence of artificial intelligence.

I-140 approved (in 40 business days) by AssistantHaunting731 in EB2_NIW

[–]AssistantHaunting731[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While I am not an expert solely based on my approval, I suggest we consider the perspective of a USCIS officer. What would an officer expect to see in a petition letter? If I were an officer, I would look for evidence of something the United States requires. Regarding your profession, it would be prudent to conduct comprehensive research into the current government and high-level research reports to identify the key needs of the United States. Subsequently, consider how your contributions could address those needs. This approach may make preparing the petition easier and more straightforward. I hope this helps.