On a recent EB-2 NIW case

Here’s a post by immigration lawyer Amber Davis on a recent EB-2 NIW case:

We’re currently working with another actuary.

Actuary EB-2 NIW cases can be strong, especially if the applicant’s work is tied to a field of national importance such as healthcare.

That being said, actuary cases sometimes do get denied, but strong ones are often worth a refile (we recently received a denial for a strong actuary case that we’re now planning on refiling).

When it comes to denials, USCIS tends to focus on the national importance element of an applicant’s work and the scope and impact of their past and proposed work.

In denials, USCIS will often state the standard but then will focus in on a combined analysis of prong one and two of the Dhanasar test and say that because you have not already made significant impact “commensurate with national importance” (whatever this means - they sure don’t define it), you do not meet the requirements of the Dhanasar test. They’re really supposed to focus on what you plan to do as part of your proposed endeavor, but sometimes officers will instead focus on an applicant’s current impact on their field (this is not the correct standard for EB-2 NIW).

If you do receive a denial and find that the officer who reviewed your application applied the wrong standard, you can file an appeal, but appeals do take a long time (at least a year at the Administrative Appeals Office level). EB-2 NIW is also one of those areas of law that is loosely defined, where the original adjudicator is given a lot of discretion. Unless the adjudicator was shockingly unreasonable (which does happen from time to time), I normally recommend refiles rather than appeals.

-

Interested in EB-1A, EB-2 NIW or O-1? Feel free to reach out to Amber at amber.davis@waypointimmigration.org or via LinkedIn messages.