Disclaimer: The contents in this web site are only for your information and are not intended to be legal advice. While many of our applicants successfully obtain their I-140 approvals, the information here should not be considered as a guarantee of your green card application outcome.
Help with evaluation of my profile for EB1
Published Apr 9,2019
By Arjun Kumar Joginipelly
Hi,
Can you please put me in the right direction if my profile aligns with EB1A. I have indicated the achievements below:
I have a total of 4 publications with a total citation count of 17. I have completed PhD in Electrical Engineering from University of New Orleans in 2014.
Reviewed a total of 12 journal papers.
I am also heading a startup company “SiteIQ” established in Jan 2018 where I have equity partnership and also have 1 patent with the company.
I am working Full time as Vice President of Engineering (executive position) at Freedom Electronics LLC with a high salary related to others in my field.
I am currently also working as a Industry Advisory Board Member for State University leading a critical role in the distinguished organization.
1 journal publications and 2 conference publications are currently under review.
Can you please guide me if I can meet EB1 criteria and what other things I should do to improve it.
Posted in EB1A
Subscribe
6 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tigran Kalaydzhyan
5 years ago
Hi Arjun,
One would have to dig deeper into the details to evaluate your case (such as looking at the order of the authorships in the published papers). I would say, the main obstacle in the number of citations – it might be difficult to prove that you are on top of the field in this case, taken the citations seem to play a bigger role lately and there is more randomness in the USCIS officers’ decisions regarding EB1A these days. I think, one could call several lawyers (first consultation is often free) to study the current environment for EB1A. Have you also refereed papers by any chance?
Author
GCforPhD
5 years ago
Hi Arjun,
Based on the list you mentioned, you should be able to meet the statutory criteria for EB1A. However like Tirgan pointed out, “Top of the field” and “sustained interest” are tricky. These two criteria are used to judge if you have “Extraordinary ability”. Generally most PhDs tend to show these two based on their number of publications (top of the field) and several citations that are spread over a number of years (sustained interest). When the number of publications are few this approach would depend on the quality and importance of the publications to other researchers in the filed.
Besides publications there are other ways to show “top of the field” and “sustained interest”. In your case, you might be able to show these based on more specifics related to 3, 4, and 5 from your list. If 3-4-5 are spread over time (at least 3 or more years) they can show sustained interest. Also if your patent is currently used in practice, it can demonstrate sustained interest and possibly support other criteria (based on specifics). If you can show evidence for “top of the field” (perhaps based on your critical role, executive position etc) there is a good chance of success.
Arjun Kumar Joginipelly
5 years ago
Hi Guys,
Thanks a lot for your response and providing me direction. I really appreciate it.
1) In reference to Tigran, I have worked on projects during my Phd with NOAA on confidential data. Due to nature of the project, the publication of the work is not allowed in journals but the
work what I have done is being used within NOAA. In regards to question “Have you also refereed papers by any chance”? I have done currently a total of 15 papers that I have reviewed
for several IEEE and Elsevier journals and still continuing to improve it.
2) In reference to GCforPhD: Thanks a lot for providing me direction on other ways of showing top of the field. I feel the same that I am better in listings 3-4-5 and I can make them stronger as
I move forward. The listing 3 and the patent is currently in practice and is the backbone for the startup. I can provide the investment details that came into the startup and revenue generated
through it. Does that suffice the requirement in terms of showing the evidence.
3) In the similar manner, I can provide evidences and recommendation letter for listing 4 on my contribution to the distinguished organization with state university. Also in regards to executive position, I can provide details about the revenue growth I created to the company over the span more than 3 years and show creation of more jobs due to the revenue growth and provide details of the hiring.
Does this direction I am thinking of collecting the evidences for the requirement listings 3-4-5 help the case make it stronger. Please let me know and if there are other ideas please don’t hesitate to suggest.
Perhaps you can use just the same point you provided to us to explain the low citation level to the USCIS officers and put emphasis on other facts instead, because your case is solid. In the past it wouldn’t be an issue, but it makes sense to figure out what is the situation at the moment. I also agree with the points provided by my colleagues. I asked about the paper refereeing because I thought with the provided credentials you probably already reviewed many papers (I could have overlooked it in your original message) and the refereeing is the easiest criterion to satisfy in the EB1A petition.
Speaking of the playing a critical role in a distinguished institution, one should definitely mention that. One should also collect letters showing that that role was critical for the institution *as a whole* (the point most of the officers use to reject the evidence).
Nymisha Avadhanam
1 year ago
Hi,
I have a phd in molecular biology with one published paper(50+ citations) and one conference paper. I currently working as an assay development scientist for a clinical diagnostic company. I have one award, been judge on conference for science organizations/currently doing it too. I am wondering what my chances will be under eb1-b. I would be glad if you can give some advice/suggestions. Appreciate your time.
Disclaimer: The contents in this web site are only for your information and are not intended to be legal advice. While many of our applicants successfully obtain their I-140 approvals, the information here should not be considered as a guarantee of your green card application outcome.
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.
Strictly Necessary Cookies
Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.
If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.
Hi Arjun,
One would have to dig deeper into the details to evaluate your case (such as looking at the order of the authorships in the published papers). I would say, the main obstacle in the number of citations – it might be difficult to prove that you are on top of the field in this case, taken the citations seem to play a bigger role lately and there is more randomness in the USCIS officers’ decisions regarding EB1A these days. I think, one could call several lawyers (first consultation is often free) to study the current environment for EB1A. Have you also refereed papers by any chance?
Hi Arjun,
Based on the list you mentioned, you should be able to meet the statutory criteria for EB1A. However like Tirgan pointed out, “Top of the field” and “sustained interest” are tricky. These two criteria are used to judge if you have “Extraordinary ability”. Generally most PhDs tend to show these two based on their number of publications (top of the field) and several citations that are spread over a number of years (sustained interest). When the number of publications are few this approach would depend on the quality and importance of the publications to other researchers in the filed.
Besides publications there are other ways to show “top of the field” and “sustained interest”. In your case, you might be able to show these based on more specifics related to 3, 4, and 5 from your list. If 3-4-5 are spread over time (at least 3 or more years) they can show sustained interest. Also if your patent is currently used in practice, it can demonstrate sustained interest and possibly support other criteria (based on specifics). If you can show evidence for “top of the field” (perhaps based on your critical role, executive position etc) there is a good chance of success.
Hi Guys,
Thanks a lot for your response and providing me direction. I really appreciate it.
1) In reference to Tigran, I have worked on projects during my Phd with NOAA on confidential data. Due to nature of the project, the publication of the work is not allowed in journals but the
work what I have done is being used within NOAA. In regards to question “Have you also refereed papers by any chance”? I have done currently a total of 15 papers that I have reviewed
for several IEEE and Elsevier journals and still continuing to improve it.
2) In reference to GCforPhD: Thanks a lot for providing me direction on other ways of showing top of the field. I feel the same that I am better in listings 3-4-5 and I can make them stronger as
I move forward. The listing 3 and the patent is currently in practice and is the backbone for the startup. I can provide the investment details that came into the startup and revenue generated
through it. Does that suffice the requirement in terms of showing the evidence.
3) In the similar manner, I can provide evidences and recommendation letter for listing 4 on my contribution to the distinguished organization with state university. Also in regards to executive position, I can provide details about the revenue growth I created to the company over the span more than 3 years and show creation of more jobs due to the revenue growth and provide details of the hiring.
Does this direction I am thinking of collecting the evidences for the requirement listings 3-4-5 help the case make it stronger. Please let me know and if there are other ideas please don’t hesitate to suggest.
Hi Arjun,
Perhaps you can use just the same point you provided to us to explain the low citation level to the USCIS officers and put emphasis on other facts instead, because your case is solid. In the past it wouldn’t be an issue, but it makes sense to figure out what is the situation at the moment. I also agree with the points provided by my colleagues. I asked about the paper refereeing because I thought with the provided credentials you probably already reviewed many papers (I could have overlooked it in your original message) and the refereeing is the easiest criterion to satisfy in the EB1A petition.
Speaking of the playing a critical role in a distinguished institution, one should definitely mention that. One should also collect letters showing that that role was critical for the institution *as a whole* (the point most of the officers use to reject the evidence).
Hi,
I have a phd in molecular biology with one published paper(50+ citations) and one conference paper. I currently working as an assay development scientist for a clinical diagnostic company. I have one award, been judge on conference for science organizations/currently doing it too. I am wondering what my chances will be under eb1-b. I would be glad if you can give some advice/suggestions. Appreciate your time.
EB1B requires sponsorship of your employer. You need to talk to your employer about this.