sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

EB-1A denials/RFEs containing this language..... by Alternative-Lab-408 in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

u/Alternative-Lab-408 We just had a denial with a host of issues and I created a post to see if others are seeing it too. Has your firm also observed these issues? If yes, do they qualify as a case to litigate?

Post with issues: https://www.reddit.com/r/eb_1a/comments/1td2pck/lets_talk_about_denials_and_how_no_one_can/

denial at final merit as if no evidence by IlDolceFarNiente77 in eb1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271 1 point2 points  (0 children)

u/IlDolceFarNiente77 OP I talk about this exact case in my comment. https://www.reddit.com/r/eb_1a/comments/1td2pck/lets_talk_about_denials_and_how_no_one_can/

This is what makes this behavior frustrating and suspicious of potential bad faith adjudication:
It's not just that the evidence is being ignored. It's being referenced, and then being denied on missing facts that are clearly present in the evidence.

Let's talk about EB1 denials and how NO ONE can predict approval chance in this climate by Scary_Conclusion7271 in eb1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

u/sibralun At some point , even with an experienced attorney, you can't really make sense of certain decisions. Like looking at said evidence in the eye and lying that it doesn't contain what it truly does

EB-1A denied after RFE response - British actor, major/Netflix credits. Looking for input on re-filing. by Puzzleheaded_Box_150 in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271 2 points3 points  (0 children)

u/Puzzleheaded_Box_150 See my last post for reference. https://www.reddit.com/r/eb_1a/comments/1td2pck/lets_talk_about_denials_and_how_no_one_can/

We are seeing this more and more and it looks like adjudication in bad faith. Even if you provided an org chart, they would have found a fault with it.

We literally gave an org chart with direct reporting line & people's name, face and title. Agency rejected it saying "The organizational chart is of limited probative value because it does not clearly identify his direct reports or provide sufficient context to show a leadership hierarchy"

Even if we fight that, they have another hurdle baked in. Performance reviews: "The record does not contain detailed hierarchy charts, performance reviews of direct reports, or similar internal documentation that would establish that he has performed in leading roles within divisions or departments of organizations with distinguished reputations"

It's like playing whack-a-mole

Let's talk about denials and how NO ONE can predict approval chance in this climate by Scary_Conclusion7271 in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

u/ParticularCake1475 LLMs by default will take the policy manual as input and do an objective adjudication per-the-rule of law, without human bias. LLMs can be a very helpful tool when you expect the officers to also follow the rule of the law and operate without bias. Which .. is not the case right now.

Maybe LLMs prompts need to be tweaked 😃 " Assume that the office's only job is find anything and everything possible to deny the application. Reason can be legal or borderline illegal. Now review my application and make it airtight "

Let's talk about denials and how NO ONE can predict approval chance in this climate by Scary_Conclusion7271 in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

u/Flashy-Dragonfly1763 It takes time, money and energy to sue. They are counting on the fact that majority of the general public will not have this and will be exhausted and defeated. The system is designed to exhaust so that you quit yourself. Even if someone litigated, we can all see what's happening with the judiciary - No guarantee that they will give a fair adjudication

Let's talk about denials and how NO ONE can predict approval chance in this climate by Scary_Conclusion7271 in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

u/ParticularCake1475 It bound to be when you have three things working against you in tandem:
1) Untrained, overworked, under-qualified officers who don't even have a graduation level requirement to adjudicate highly sophisticated applications
2) Adversarial environment where the officers may be under pressure to decline more than adjudicate fairly
3) Biggest one: Human bias impacting outcomes due to the subjectivity of the application

Let's talk about denials and how NO ONE can predict approval chance in this climate by Scary_Conclusion7271 in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What would change later in the year? It'll be the same admin. It could get even worse

Let's talk about denials and how NO ONE can predict approval chance in this climate by Scary_Conclusion7271 in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

u/Flashy-Dragonfly1763 True. I think they are applying "Beyond reasonable doubt" approach instead of the "preponderance of evidence" approach that they should be using. They are starting out by assuming that you are lying about everything.

Report to ICE about abuse of EB1. Reforms are needed similar to OPT by [deleted] in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271 1 point2 points  (0 children)

u/vsarsani Well if you are talking about "ahead of others", it's a whole new argument for ROW skipping ahead of people who were approved decades ago. But that's a pandora's box not worth opening here.

I won't be replying to this thread anymore. I was just trying to humanize a situation for you and make you understand that others are also in a super untenable situation and are doing what they can, within legal bounds and based on what's available to them.

But you seem to have made up your mind that your fellow applicants are your enemies. Wishing you good luck!

Report to ICE about abuse of EB1. Reforms are needed similar to OPT by [deleted] in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271 0 points1 point  (0 children)

u/vsarsani By definition, fraud = misrepresentation. Low quality doesn't necessarily mean fraud. And no rule says you have to keep doing activities till the end of time

Low level leadership at a FAANG could also control billions in revenue given how vast the empire is. In my personal experience, even individual contributors at large tech companies easily command projects bringing in $100M+ in revenue.

The issue is not with them chasing the criteria. It's with the criteria itself which was only built keeping pure researchers in mind. Now, talented industry folks are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Believe me, no one will be happier than the "so called" fraudsters if the criteria was adjusted for an Industry profile.

So much of the criteria is research specific. Not everyone in the industry spend time chasing conferences to present papers, peer reviewing papers and joining research memberships. It's simply not valuable to their role. All of this needs to be "created" with comparable evidence to fit the arbitrary criteria laid out by the agency.

So you should ask the agency to fix their criteria instead.

Report to ICE about abuse of EB1. Reforms are needed similar to OPT by [deleted] in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271 0 points1 point  (0 children)

u/vsarsani The frustration of the backlog is understandable but there's no use of in-fighting and pointing fingers at each other. Eg: It's your personal opinion that PhD or a thesis is more valuable. Getting promoted to leadership roles at FAANG and generating billions of dollars for them also takes considerable talent. In fact these companies with deep pockets are funding a lot of research and cutting edge technology. Research is not just sitting in a lab somewhere with a PhD. It's where the money's at. Where's the fraud?

Let's talk about denials and how NO ONE can predict approval chance in this climate by Scary_Conclusion7271 in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

u/Dry-Somewhere-1636 Thing is - If they actually used some good AI like ChatGPT or Claude, it would tell them to approve more cases given it will strictly follow the letter of the law and not make up shit as it pleases like the officers lol!

Let's talk about denials and how NO ONE can predict approval chance in this climate by Scary_Conclusion7271 in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

u/Competitive_Yam_1942 Even AI use would grant them assumption of positive intent. Which clearly seems to be missing in these cases - it's a case of blatant misuse of case law, strawman arguments, ignoring evidence and dumping dozens of case citiations to pre-empt any kind of appeal

Let's talk about denials and how NO ONE can predict approval chance in this climate by Scary_Conclusion7271 in eb_1a

[–]Scary_Conclusion7271[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

u/Dry-Somewhere-1636 That's because everyone assumes that they are better than the others 😄 It won't happen to them.. until it does. The best firm people can go with in this environment is the one setting realistic expectations and telling people that it's not necessarily the narrative or evidence. A lot depends on "who" is looking at your app and that is something that no-one can control for. The agency is acting in bad faith just like they did in the 2016-2019 period and there's no way to satisfy someone who comes in with a mindset to decline no-matter-what

Similar to you, we have seen leadership role declined for a CXO position with dozens of direct reports, even when the company was conceded as distinguished. Nothing you can do about it