Immigorithm's Posts
Nairaland Forum › Immigorithm's Profile › Immigorithm's Posts
1 (of 1 pages)
santos247:A useful first step is to identify the exact visa category and the problem created by the previous refusals. Someone who mainly handles visitor visas may not be the right fit for an EB-1A, EB-2 NIW or O-1A matter. Before retaining anyone, verify the lawyer's U.S. state-bar status and disciplinary history, ask who will draft and review the work, request a written scope and fee agreement, and ask how prior refusals and inconsistent form answers will be reviewed. No representative should promise an approval. The full refusal records and prior submissions matter more than a short summary of the complications. |
Aweomeuche:It is not possible to assess chances from these labels alone. Start by defining the proposed field and the work to be pursued in the United States, then examine each item for what it proves. For EB-2, a bachelor's degree followed by at least five years of progressive post-degree experience in the specialty may support the advanced-degree classification, but a national interest waiver still requires a separate Dhanasar analysis. For EB-1A, the type, selectivity and scope of the awards matter, and published material must be about the person and their work in qualifying media. Fifteen years of experience is context, not a criterion by itself. |
OgbeniOptional:A category cannot be identified from the degrees and two papers alone. For EB-2, the first question is whether the education and experience establish the advanced-degree or exceptional-ability classification. A national interest waiver is a separate analysis: the proposed endeavour must have substantial merit and national importance, the person must be well positioned to advance it, and the record must show why waiving the job-offer and labour-certification requirements would benefit the United States. It would help to define the work the person plans to continue, the problem it addresses, and the evidence connecting their background to that endeavour. |
OneLocalMan:The best starting point is the RFE itself, not the number of criteria claimed. List every factual and legal concern the officer raised, then map each one to the exact evidence and explanation that answers it. More documents are useful only when they close a specific gap. For example, a critical-role response should show both what made the role critical and why the organisation is distinguished. Original contributions should connect the work to significance in the field, not only describe the work. The response should also keep final merits in view, since satisfying at least three criteria is only the first step. |
HustlaOfLagos:They have a surface resemblance because both may use evidence of achievement and recognition, but they are separate systems with different legal tests. EB-1A requires either a qualifying one-time achievement or evidence meeting at least three listed criteria, followed by a final-merits review of whether the record as a whole shows sustained acclaim and that the person is among the small percentage at the top of the field. The UK Global Talent route uses its own endorsement or eligible-prize framework. Some documents may be useful in both applications, but an argument built for one should not be copied into the other. The evidence has to be mapped to the exact test of the route being used. |
1 (of 1 pages)