AOS Interview Today - Approved!
yeaaaahh..i am so happy and that wouldnt have been possible w/o this forum and all the help I have received!
yeaaaahh..i am so happy and that wouldnt have been possible w/o this forum and all the help I have received!
Alright, first off thank you to everyone that helped me out with what to bring!
We showed up with about 30 pounds of paperwork, photos, tax returns, wedding albums, cards.
Our appointment was at 1 pm, we arrived around 12:15. We got in the lineup, and waited. and waited and waited. (got a little warm considering it is still in the high 80s, 90s) At about 12:55 they let us in along with a swarm of other people coming in for the same thing (and some naturalization cases) We signed in, and waited right up at the door to be called.
As I got my approval/551 stamp this week, I thought it would be best to share some experience to help others; This may be applicable in Texas and
Atlanta, so read with caution and use accordingly.
Texas SC
485 rcpt date 2/2002
FP done 4/2003
Approved 5/2004
My online status never changed, except when approved (No change during FP etc). This may help some who are worried like me when online status never changed.
For updates, see my blog page on Obama's Immigration Action.
Takeaway points for legal immigration from President Obama’s executive action:
1. USCIS is “about to” publish the final rule on H-4 work authorization. That will make it possible for certain spouses of H-1 holders to get work authorization.
2. Improving employment-based green card backlogs by:
a. Making visa issuance more efficient so no immigrant visas are wasted;
b. Providing for better AC21 rules and other ways to keep immigrant visas intact after a change of jobs. USCIS will clarify what constitutes “same or similar” job so that AC21 will not stop workers from getting promotions or even changing to related jobs within their field. USCIS must clear the path to career progression for green card applicants.
3. Expandingfurther the OPT time for STEM students, but creating tighter control on which universities/schools/degrees are eligible and ensure local workers are protected (Implement some sort of a “mini PERM?”).
4. Creating opportunities for foreign “inventors, researchers and founders of start-up” companies to come to the USA through an existing program called “National Interest Waiver.” Unfortunately for India, this is an EB-2 category program requiring several years of wait. But the following parole program will help:
a. Creating a parole (which is usually a temporary, but very quick measure and could eventually lead to a green card) program so that on a case-by-case bases, “inventors, researchers and founders of start-up” companies can be brought quickly into the USA where:
i.They have raised financing in the USA; OR
ii.Otherwise hold the promise of innovation and job creation through development of new technologies OR cutting edge research
5. Creating guidelines for exceptionally qualified or advanced degreed individuals to come to the USA through an existing program called “National Interest Waiver.” As noted, unfortunately for India, this is an EB-2 category program requiring several years of wait. But the parole option above could be helpful.
6. Providing clear guidance on L-1B program as to who can qualify.
We won a case for National Interest Waiver a Microbiologist holding a Ph.D., 12 publications and over ten years research experience. We were able to provide evidence of a strong national interest through numerous letters of recommendation from leading scientists. This applicant had an international reputation in his field.
This applicant was a data recovery specialist under contract with the U.S. government providing critical skills to a high-level project. It was noted by referees that his knowledge and background were rare and greatly needed in the interest of our national defense. We provided documentation of his academic achievements as well as additional specialized training.
We won this case for an applicant with five years research experience. The applicant was able to secure a very strong letter from the National Science Foundation director which detailed the innovative and pioneering work of the applicant. It was noted that his skills were critical for an initiative developed by the Foundation. We also offered evidence of his strong Ph.D. work as well as his publication record.
Here is a commonly encountered situation for AOS applicants (I-485 pending) from our clients-only extranet:
Trying to get an F-1 while an AOS/I-485 is pending has been a recurring theme in our community. Last year in May/June we had spent two hours talking about this theme in our community conference calls. A lot of people wanted to do their MBA and were not able to wait for their green cards to join school.
Generally speaking when you have exhibited immigrant intent, getting an F-1 becomes difficult. On top of that, USCIS has said that F-1 is not compatible with a simultaneous I-485. But USCIS has never told us what happens if do file for an F-1 while an I-485 is pending.
We obtained both and Outstanding Researcher and National Interest Waiver for this applicant. Based on his strong academic record and exceptional work experience we were able to obtain letters of recommendation from leading experts around the world. The applicant was currently working for one of the most prestigious research/teaching institutes in the world. His innovative research was noted internationally and he had multiple scholarly articles in well-respected journals. He also held membership in leading professional societies.&nbs
We won a case for National Interest Waiver for a Physician working in a medically underserved area. We provided a five year contract, copy of his J-1 Waiver approval, numerous experience letters, a letter from the Department of State and documentation to reflect statistics of health professional shortage in the area.
We won both an EB1 Alien of Extraordinary Ability case and a National Interest Waiver for this applicant. He was noted as being an exceptionally qualified, brilliant and outstanding researcher amongst an international peer group. We provided copies of his substantial publication record as well as evidence of his numerous "invited" presentations. This applicant had patented material which was identified as innovative and pioneering in the field and admired by top researchers.
We won this case as the applicant was noted to be a critical component to the success of various projects and had a very large impact on the research program. Referees described this applicant's talents to be rare and difficult to replace by U.S. workers. Her original and pioneering research made her uniquely qualified to further this intrinsically important research which greatly effected the nation as a whole.
We won a National Interest Waiver case for a Molecular Biologist holding a Ph.D. having over ten years of research experience. We argued that her qualifications were unique as compared to others in the field and that she was noted as one of the few in her field that has achieved the highest level of success. She had remarkable contributions to the field, most notably her significant discoveries in cardiovascular research. This applicant had an extensive publication list as well as a book chapter.
We won a National Interest Waiver case for an applicant holding an M.D., Ph.D. and MSE in Biomedical Engineering, and a B.Tech. in Electrical Engineering. This applicant had an extraordinary background. His degrees were received from the most prestigious institutes in the world, notably Harvard, MIT and Johns Hopkins University . His pioneering work has lead others in the field to a better understanding of what causes sudden cardiac death through fatal arrhythmias. His work was quoted as "revolutionizing health care."
This applicant provided a 5-year contract for services in a medically underserved area, a copy of his J-1 residency requirement waiver, letters from the Health and Human Services office in his area requesting his services, documentation to reflect the statistics of the health professional shortage in his employment area as well as copies of his license to practice medicine.
We won a case for a physician who provided a contract for services for 5 years in a medically underserved area. This applicant also submitted copies of his degree, medical license, medical degree equivalency evaluation, USMLE Step 1, 2 and 3, status paperwork, letter from potential employer stating need, documentation of statistical data on medically underserved area and a letter from Bureau of Health Care Services.