DISCLAIMER: The case described below was not prepared or filed by our firm. This case was sourced from public records.
When applying for an EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW), presenting a thorough and consistent case is essential. Recently, a petition for an EB-2 NIW was denied, revealing several critical issues that contributed to the unfavorable decision. In this blog post, we’ll speak about the main errors in the petition and provide valuable insights for future applicants.
Today, we will talk about a doctor who, despite the importance of her profession and impressive work experience in her home country, received a denial. The applicant submitted the petition on her own, without an attorney, confident in her abilities. Let's take a closer look at what the immigration service focused on before issuing the denial.
Issues with Educational Equivalency
To demonstrate your educational qualifications when applying for an EB-2 NIW, you need to consult one of the accredited U.S. firms that can evaluate your credentials and determine the equivalent U.S. educational level.
One major issue with the petition was the assessment of the petitioner’s educational credentials. The petitioner submitted academic equivalency evaluations from Educational Credential Evaluations, Inc. (ECE), but these evaluations had significant shortcomings. They lacked detailed explanations on how ECE determined the U.S. equivalency of the petitioner’s Nigerian degrees.
Without this crucial information, it’s challenging to understand the true value of the petitioner’s education in the U.S. context. Additionally, the evaluations were unsigned, which undermined their credibility and weight. USCIS highlighted that unsigned evaluations carry little weight and may be dismissed if questioned. The evaluations only indicated that the petitioner had the equivalent of a U.S. bachelor’s degree and six years of study in a medical program but did not confirm whether she held an equivalent U.S. Doctor of Medicine degree.
Moreover, the record did not include evidence of U.S. licensure to practice medicine, which is essential for demonstrating qualifications for the NIW.
Discrepancies in Professional Qualifications
The petitioner claimed to be a "medical doctor" but faced issues with proving this claim. The petitioner’s Nigerian medical license had expired in 2013, raising questions about her ability to practice medicine anywhere, including the U.S. Despite passing the USMLE, the record did not clarify whether these scores were valid for U.S. licensure, as some states have specific requirements. Additionally, the petitioner initially submitted an unofficial transcript and a certificate for a master’s degree from a non-accredited institution, which did not
adequately support the claim of holding an advanced degree. The absence of a U.S. diploma further complicated the evaluation.
An interesting aspect of this case is that the USCIS officer did determine that the petitioner is a “member of the professions holding an advanced degree.” However, the officer confirmed that the evidence provided was insufficient to establish the petitioner as a U.S. physician.
Inconsistent Proposed Endeavor
A critical aspect of the EB-2 NIW petition is demonstrating how the proposed endeavor benefits the national interest. Here’s where the petitioner faced issues:
The initial petition lacked a detailed job description or job title for the proposed U.S. employment, and there was no ETA 750 Part B or ETA 9089 forms submitted.
After receiving a Request for Evidence (RFE), the petitioner shifted the proposed employment from being a medical doctor to working as an epidemiologist. This change introduced new facts about her employment, which began after the petition was filed. The new evidence included conflicting job letters and an unclear description of how her work as an epidemiologist aligned with national interest criteria.
Any changes in statements made in response to an RFE are viewed very negatively by the immigration service.
Response to Requests for Evidence (RFE)
The petitioner’s responses to RFE were problematic. They did not adequately address the Director’s concerns about licensure or the details of the proposed endeavor. The petitioner’s new evidence mainly focused on her past role rather than clarifying her proposed future work. Significant changes were made to the petition after the initial filing. The Dhanasar framework requires that the petitioner establish eligibility at the time of filing, and material changes to the petition cannot be used to correct deficiencies post-filing.
The denial of this EB-2 NIW petition highlights the critical importance of presenting complete and consistent documentation. This includes providing detailed and credible educational evaluations, clear evidence of professional qualifications, and a well-defined proposed endeavor that aligns with national interest criteria. For future applicants, ensuring that all documentation is accurate, signed, and relevant to the petition’s requirements is essential for improving the chances of a successful EB-2 NIW application.
Before an officer begins evaluating the criteria, they carefully review the applicant's educational qualifications and business plan. If the applicant lacks the appropriate education (higher than a bachelor's degree) or if their education does not align with the proposed occupation, the immigration service will pay less attention to assessing the criteria during the petition process. This is exactly what happened in our case.
These mistakes could have been avoided if the applicant had consulted an experienced attorney. An attorney would have immediately questioned whether the client's education meets U.S. standards and why the applicant has not obtained a license to practice despite considerable time passing. The EB-2 NIW is one of the most challenging visas to obtain, and we recommend seeking assistance from a licensed and experienced attorney for more information or help with your EB-2 NIW petition.
Comments