Making the Impossible Possible and Simple: Approval after Denials & RFEs (part I)

Making the Impossible Possible and Simple: Approval after Denials & RFEs (part I)

Michael Bloomberg, the mayor of New York City, once remarked—

“Canada sets aside 36 percent of their visas for people with skills they think their country needs. We set aside six percent. We educate the doctors, and then don’t give ’em a green card.”

This lends to the worldwide perception that obtaining a Green Card for permanent residency in the United States can be one of the most aggravating and discouraging processes to which any foreign national, even those educated at institutions within the United States, is subjected throughout the entirety of their professional tenures and personal ventures. The steps and requirements to receive a Green Card appear endless and vague to even the most seasoned legal representatives and citizen experts. Nevertheless, tens of thousands of foreign nationals are compelled to undergo the ‘rigorous’ process in order to enjoy the many benefits that encompass a Green Card approval, whether that be for personal and familial motives or merely as a means to advance one’s career in this era of globalization and Western pervasion.

Although, coupled with widespread knowledge of this competitive environment and due to the inherent ambiguity in terms of both visa availability and the qualifications needed to receive a visa approval, the vast majority of these motivated foreign nationals eventually either succumb to unbeknownst pressures and thus choose to not apply, or more commonly, they receive the formidable denial or RFE (request for evidence). Ultimately, this leads to a large accumulation of cases that are either not adjudicated properly or not adjudicated at all, the former of which associates at Chen Immigration Law are constantly and fervently seeking to remedy in the objective of providing transparent legal advice to the USCIS and our clients alike. It is this ‘attitude of advisory’ for which Chen Immigration Law prides itself, primarily because it removes the counterproductive assertive and pathos clauses that invade legal logic in petition proceedings, while simultaneously facilitating the provision of unbiased legal recommendations to our clientele – past, current, and prospective.

In other words, we at Chen Immigration examine cases using a proven framework, which identifies the strongpoints in individual cases, thereby providing a foundation for strategic planning and case presentation. Moreover, by examining cases on an individual-level and maintaining an ‘attitude of advisory,’ we develop each of our cases in a manner that advises the USCIS to approve the case, rather than demanding regulatory adherence or inputting mandatory prima facie acceptance. This approach alleviates the need for finding “loopholes” or constructing over-zealous arguments in hopes of receiving approval, and instead, respectfully advises the USCIS to account and evaluate each facet of the petitioner’s highlighted qualifications in addition to the totality of evidence presented in guarantee of the most adequate and appropriate adjudication measures. Under which manner, the USCIS does not feel ‘forced’ to excavate through one’s case to uncover the factual foundations for adjudication, but rather feels ‘pleased’ to evaluate the evidence presented in compliance with the relevant regulatory guidelines, which are in fact far more transparent than one is led to believe.

Therefore, in order to exemplify our “attitude of advisory,” insofar as explicitly demonstrating how we make the supposed impossible possible, two actual past cases of ours are presented and detailed below. They differ radically from one another in expectation that this article will benefit foreign nationals from all fields seeking to transform their case potential from impossible to possible. Since many of our clients – past and current – come to our firm after receiving multiple denials and/or RFEs and ultimately leave us satisfied with an approval in-hand, we hope that this article helps to, at minimum, ameliorate some of the stressors caused by these letters in the planned objective and anticipation of future approvals for those in current and future undertakings with the USCIS. Indeed, following one of these cases, in the feedback, the client noted to the effect that—

“You guys make the impossible possible.”

CASE ONE – CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE & PUBLIC HEALTH (EB-1A)

The first case concerns one of the most disheartening cases we have ever encountered here at Chen Immigration Law Associates, and deals with a medical doctor in the field of cardiovascular medicine and public health. The client had received two EB1A and two NIW denials filed by another law firm prior to retaining the services of our firm, which was one of the main reasons we decided to take the case, albeit somewhat ambitiously and altruistically. Nonetheless, since the client was from India, it was imperative that he receive a first-preference visa approval (EB-1), rather than a national interest waiver under the second-preference category (EB-2).

At first glance (and apparently second and third as well), an immigration officer or immigration attorney would likely be convinced that the case held little weight under the relevant regulatory criterion. Due to the clinic-based focus and underserved communal ventures of the client, he had very few publications or presentations in scholarly journals or conference proceedings, which would allow for the large citation record allegedly required for petition approval for experts in the field of medicine and public health. In fact, at the time of filing (and at the time we responded to the RFE), the client had only 10 citations to less than 10 published manuscripts of his work, and boasted a relatively routine level of editorial/reviewer contributions as compared to other experts in the field.

Despite these superficial statistics, we delved into the strongpoints of the case, and found two additional pieces of key evidence which were either underemphasized or utterly omitted from the current previous filings. For instance, we found that the client held a Fellowship in the American College of Physicians (F.A.C.P.), but noted that this membership was neither emphasized nor described in the previous filings, and instead was lost in the long list of non-qualifying memberships claimed in the original petition. By clarifying the scope and field of our client’s impact, and aligning this redefined focus with the submission of newly itemized documentation of his influence on the field as a whole, we were able to successfully claim two additional criterion, and frame the case in a clear and concise manner which accurately and advantageously depicted the true merits of the case – quantitatively and qualitatively. Effectively, we were able to advise the USCIS to approve the case through respectfully directing the adjudicating officer to the highlights of qualifying evidence, therein pointing to an overwhelming accumulation of evidence in the totality of such submitted, rather than focusing on persuading the USCIS via extensive argumentation and counterproductive lists of qualifications and evidence.

The case was approved approximately one month after the USCIS received our response to the RFE. Admittedly, some clients are reluctant to our seemingly non-assertive approach to green card filings, yet the client in this case was completely cooperative with our requests for documentation acquisition, thus expediting and ensuring the optimal construction of his case. And while the USCIS does not relinquish their rationale for approving each case, I am convinced herein that the petition approval was due to the alternative strategy we employed via the redefinition of the petitioner’s scope and field, the realignment and reacquisition of pertinent supporting materials, and the ultimate advisory-based approach of the petition letter. By way of explaining the most important and otherwise misunderstood or misinterpreted evidentiary submissions in detail, further misinterpretation and malfeasance was deterred, and the adjudicating officer was capable of issuing a sound decision amicable to the interests of both parties. In a sense, the initial investigation of qualifying evidence and subsequent presentation of qualifying evidence was coordinated by Chen Immigration and our client, and only the evaluation was left to the adjudicating officer. Essentially, in cases where the case is not properly presented, the faults and consequences of improper or adverse evaluations may not solely rest with the adjudicating officer, as the USCIS has incessantly stated-

“Whenever any person makes an application for immigration benefit, they shall bear the burden of proof to establish eligibility for the benefit sought.”

North America Immigration Law Group (Chen Immigration Law Associates) is a U.S. immigration law firm dedicated to representing corporations, research institutions, and individuals from all 50 U.S. states regarding I-140 immigration petitions. We specialize in employment-based immigration petition and have a proven record of high success rate for the categories of: EB2-NIW (National Interest Waiver), EB1-A (Alien of Extraordinary Ability), EB1-B (Outstanding Researcher/Professor) and O-1 (Alien of Extraordinary Ability).

Our Ten Thousand I-140 Approvals Provide Unprecedented Insight into the USCIS Adjudication Trend

With more than 47,000 EB-1A, EB-1B, EB-2 NIW and O-1 cases approved, we have first hand information on the manner in which the USCIS adjudicate I-140 cases. As the USCIS has constantly changed its adjudication standards for the EB-1A, EB-1B and EB-2 NIW categories, our firm's huge database of successful cases gives you unprecedented insight to USCIS adjudication trends. We carefully analyze the data for all of our cases and apply the results of our analyses toward giving our clients up-to-date advice and adapting our strategies such that we remain on par with the ever-shifting landscape of immigration law in the U.S. With us, you will always have access to important updates, strategies, and information so that you can make the most informed decisions about your case.

We Have Helped Hundreds and Thousands of Clients with Credentials and Backgrounds Similar to Yours

With our exceedingly large number of successful petitions, no matter what credentials you have, no matter your background and field of expertise, no matter your visa status or nationality, chances are we have helped hundreds or even thousands of clients just like you. Our clients are usually impressed with how well we understand their research and work. Our insight and understanding stems from the fact that we have handled many cases with elements similar to yours already, and this helps us devise the best strategies for each individual petition.

Vast Majority of Clients Came to Us Because of Referrals

For years, our firm has attracted new clients based solely on word of mouth, recommendations, and the positive collaboration experiences shared with them by their friends and family. We take pride in our reputation and work hard to ensure that we provide a green card application experience that our clients are happy to share with their friends and colleagues. That is how our approved cases grew from 600 in 2013 to over 47,000 in 2023.