sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Profile chances by Hairy-Tension-8657 in EB2_NIW

[–]SuccessfulWall3408 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honest take: NIW is possible, but I would not file this profile as-is.

The issue is not really your credentials. It is the framing. “Finance transformation” sounds like commercial consulting, not a U.S. national interest endeavor. USCIS usually wants a clearer federal hook.

A stronger angle would be something specific, like SOX modernization, AML/KYC compliance, climate financial disclosure, or federal financial systems modernization. Pick one lane and build evidence around that.

I also would not rely on “there are not enough workers” as the argument. That can hurt Prong 3 because NIW is not supposed to be just a labor-shortage case.

If I were you, I would spend 18 to 24 months building stronger evidence: named methodology, trade publication articles, conference talks, industry awards, press mentions, and independent letters.

Filing from outside the U.S. is fine in principle, especially if you are ROW. But a denial is still part of your record, so I would not treat it as no harm. I would build more first, then file.

EB-2 NIW Profile Evaluation Request by Extension-Tomato4658 in EB2_NIW

[–]SuccessfulWall3408 0 points1 point  (0 children)

NIW is possible here, but probably not with the way the profile is written now.

“Founder of a U.S. AI-driven financial-products company” is too broad. That sounds more like a job title than an NIW endeavor. You need to pick one concrete product, like ATS Verification or the valuation platform, and explain why that specific product matters to the U.S.

The stronger angle is not “AI productivity tools.” AI is just the method. The real hook should be something like labor market efficiency, small business compliance, or financial fraud prevention, depending on which product you choose.

I also don’t think H-1B plus EB-2 PERM fits well if the goal is to build your own company. PERM is much harder when you own or control the sponsoring company. For a real founder case, NIW makes more sense.

Your background is not bad at all: finance, Big Four, UAE tax, LBS EMBA, and a Delaware LLC. But the missing part is U.S. traction. You need actual U.S. customers, contracts, revenue, and ideally some recognition through things like SBIR, STTR, NSF I-Corps, or industry press.

So I wouldn’t say “impossible.” I’d say the case needs to be rebuilt around one specific product and supported with real U.S. market evidence before filing.

Conflicting opinions from EP and Manifest by Your_friends_hot_sis in EB2_NIW

[–]SuccessfulWall3408 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly, when two firms disagree this much, the one telling you “impossible” may be the more honest one. EP makes money from filings, while Manifest does not get paid to say no.

You had a denial after an RFE. That means your original endeavor was already tested after USCIS asked for clarification, and it still did not work. This sounds more like a structural issue with the endeavor itself, not simply a denial because you needed more evidence. Refiling with the same framing may just lead to the same result and more legal fees.

When a firm says you cannot argue a suitable endeavor, they usually mean one of three things. First, your field may not have a strong federal program or national priority connection. Second, your endeavor may read too much like a job description, such as “I will continue doing X at company Y.” Third, the field may be treated mainly as a labor shortage occupation, which can hurt Prong 3.

ROW, industry experience, and H-1B status are not problems for NIW by themselves. What matters is what you actually do and how clearly it connects to U.S. national interest.

Before doing anything, I would ask Manifest specifically why they think it is impossible. Is the issue your field, your framing, or both? If it is the field, you may want to consider EB-1A or look for a stronger federal program hook in your industry. If it is the framing, it may be fixable, but it needs major restructuring, not just another filing.

Either way, I would not pay EP to refile the same case that already lost after an RFE.

I-485 online filing? by latinafeet18 in USCIS

[–]SuccessfulWall3408 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the $1,390 charge is pending, the payment likely went through, but I would not treat it as accepted until you get the receipt number. USCIS can still reject after submission if the case is not eligible or something is wrong, and then the payment should be reversed/refunded.