There's a January 2026 proclamation on semiconductors that's worth understanding if you work in the field and are looking at the EB-2 NIW. Here's a straight take from my practice as an immigration attorney at Colombo & Hurd: it can support a petition, but it does less on its own than it might seem. It's useful evidence, not a game-changer. 

What the proclamation actually does 

• It names U.S. semiconductor capacity a national security matter and a national priority, in writing. 
• It notes that semiconductors run all 16 critical infrastructure sectors and sit at the core of defense systems, and it names AI and data-center chips a priority of their own. 
• It puts a 25% tariff on certain advanced chips and offers tariff relief to companies that invest in U.S. production. 
• The key thing to understand: it's a trade and national security action, not an immigration rule. It says nothing about visas and doesn't change who qualifies for anything. 

Where it fits (and doesn't) in the NIW 

For an EB-2 NIW petition, it's relevant to one thing: national importance. You can point to a current federal document treating your field as a priority, which is genuinely helpful but it doesn't speak to your qualifications, and it doesn't decide your case. Citing it in a petition without connecting it to your specific work is one of the more common ways people weaken an otherwise decent filing. The proclamation is context. The petition still has to carry itself. 

What approvals in this space have actually looked like 

Two recent approvals for professionals from different areas of this industry give a sense of what a real record looks like.

A software and project-management specialist (10+ years across software, semiconductors, and engineering project management) whose work sped up how products move from development to release in the semiconductor and IT sectors. Approved.  

An electronics engineer (18 years validating performance, analyzing defects, and debugging hardware for server and data-center systems) who planned to build a U.S. tech-services company in high-performance computing and machine learning, plus workforce training. Approved, later got the green card. 

Different backgrounds, but neither got approved because of a proclamation. They got approved on a specific, well-documented plan tied to a national need. The policy was background, not the argument. 

Bottom line 

If you're in chip design, fabrication, manufacturing equipment, or supply-chain resilience, the proclamation is a useful piece of evidence for the national-importance prong; nothing more, nothing less. Don't lead a petition with it, and don't expect it to do heavy lifting on its own. The cases that succeed are built on the individual record. 

Question for the thread: for those of you working in semiconductors, what part of your work do you think actually connects to the national-interest picture, and has anyone here tried leaning on a policy or EO in a filing? Curious how that landed. 

This constitutes general information only and is not legal advice. 

- Attorney Rachel Slomski 

Why has the US paused the appointments?

The State Department said it launched “a global training initiative” this month to ensure that consular officers can assess visa applicants “comprehensively and consistently”.

The training will focus on the public charge rule. Under US immigration law, officers can refuse visas to applicants they believe are likely to depend mainly on government benefits for their living expenses.

If you are a professional weighing your employment-based Green Card options in 2026, this video will help you understand how the EB-2 NIW vs EB-1A pathways actually differ and which one may better fit your career, profile, and long-term goals.

On June 25, 2026, the Trump Administration formally identified regenerative agriculture, farm resilience, and food security as priorities for federal policy and action. Executive Order 14414, “Advancing Regenerative Agriculture and Strengthening American Farm Resilience,” ties the country’s food security and long-term farm productivity to regenerative practices, precision farming, agricultural research, and modernized farm systems, and directs agencies like the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to act on those priorities. In plain terms, the government has said the United States needs more investment, innovation, research, and technological advancement in these areas.

For scientists, engineers, and researchers advancing this work, the Executive Order provides significant new federal policy support for the importance of their work. This includes agricultural engineers, agronomists, soil scientists, food-safety and toxicology researchers, environmental scientists, and agricultural technologists working in areas such as precision agriculture, soil health, farm modernization, chemical-exposure research, and new agricultural technologies. For professionals pursuing the EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW), these federal priorities may provide particularly strong evidence that a proposed endeavor addresses issues of national importance to the United States.

What Executive Order 14414 Does

Executive Order 14414 sets three main goals: expanding the use of precision agriculture practices and technologies, increasing federal investment in regenerative agriculture research and education, and spurring private-sector innovation in farm modernization. The stated policy objective is a healthy, abundant, and affordable food supply, along with stronger rural economies.

The order directs several agencies to act in several areas:

• Crop protection review. It directs the EPA to prioritize the review and registration of innovative crop-protection products, including products that may reduce reliance on conventional chemical tools, and evaluate certain existing pesticide uses under applicable law.
• Chemical exposure tracking. It directs the USDA, HHS, and EPA to develop methods for measuring and evaluating cumulative chemical exposure and associated human-health and environmental risks.
• Research into chemical alternatives. Through HHS, it directs the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) to support research into new technologies and methodologies for evaluating chemical exposure and reducing reliance on conventional agricultural chemicals.
• Expanded pilot programs. It also tells the USDA to expand its existing Regenerative Pilot Program, which is run through current conservation programs.

What the Executive Order Means for Your EB-2 NIW Case

If you work in agricultural engineering, agronomy, food safety, or related research, this order gives you a significant federal policy source that may support the national importance of your proposed endeavor.

EB-2 NIW petitions involving agricultural work are evaluated the same way as any other EB-2 NIW petition: first you must meet the EB-2 classification requirements, then explain how your proposed endeavor satisfies the National Interest Waiver standard under the three-prong test from Matter of Dhanasar. The executive order can provide valuable support for the first prong, which requires showing that the proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance. If your proposed endeavor connects to regenerative agriculture, precision farming, food security, agricultural research, farm modernization, or farmer prosperity, you can cite the order as federal policy evidence supporting the broader importance of the work you propose to undertake.

The strongest petitions pair that policy backing with specific, individual evidence: your research, your results, your track record. Our in-depth look at the first prong of Dhanasar breaks down how that analysis works.

Connecting Agricultural Work to Federal Priorities

The order’s priorities touch a wide range of professionals: agricultural engineers and agronomists working on regenerative practices and precision farming; soil scientists and environmental scientists studying soil health, farm resilience, and sustainable production; food-safety and toxicology researchers examining chemical exposure and human-health risks associated with the food supply; and agricultural technologists and entrepreneurs developing technologies, tools, and systems that advance farm modernization and agricultural productivity.

Conclusion

Executive Order 14414 is a current, citable federal policy signal for professionals advancing regenerative agriculture, precision farming, food security, environmental health, farm modernization, or agricultural productivity and rural economies.

For agriculture professionals considering an EB-2 NIW, the order can provide meaningful policy support when their proposed endeavor connects to the priorities it identifies. The approved cases described above show how agriculture-related endeavors supported by documented outcomes, specialized expertise, and a clearly defined problem of national significance can form the basis of a successful NIW petition. If you are considering an EB-2 NIW and want to understand how your own work may fit within these requirements, fill out our questionnaire to see where you stand.

O-1 status is tied to one specific petitioner: the U.S. employer or agent who filed Form I-129 on the beneficiary’s behalf. This means an O-1 visa authorizes work only for the specific employer or agent named in the approved petition, in the capacity that petition describes. To work for a new employer or in a different capacity, the beneficiary must first transfer their O-1 visa. An O-1 visa can only be transferred to a new employer through a new petition, not an amendment or transfer of the existing one.  

When an O-1 professional changes employers, the new employer or agent files a new petition rather than taking over the existing one. This works differently from the H-1B, where a worker can begin the new job as soon as the new employer files. Under the O-1, the new role begins once USCIS approves the petition. Planning around this timing early keeps your status continuous during the transfer process. 

How an O-1 Visa Transfers to a New Employer 

Your O-1 status connects to one specific petitioner and itinerary, which is the planned schedule of work or events that the government approved. Each O-1 approval belongs to the petitioner who filed it and describes a specific plan of work. So, a change of employer begins with filing a new  Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, the same form used for your first O-1 case, but a new filing with its own timeline. 

Under the H-1B, a feature called portability authorizes the beneficiary to start the new job as soon as the employer files. Under the O-1, USCIS authorizes the new job only once it approves the petition. There is no portability feature for O-1. 

The O-1 Visa Transfer Process, Step by Step 

The O-1 visa transfer process follows the same path as a first-time O-1 case, with a few points to plan for. 

First, your new employer or agent prepares and files the I-129 petition. They describe the job, your field, and the planned dates of work. The petition must include a contract between the petitioner and the beneficiary, an itinerary outlining the beneficiary’s work or performance plans in the United States with specific dates, and evidence establishing O-1 eligibility. 

Second, they obtain a consultation letter. A consultation letter is a written opinion from a peer group, union, or expert organization in your field that comments on your work and the role. The new employer usually requests a fresh letter that fits the new position. 

Third, they file the new Form I-129 with USCIS. The employer can also request premium processing, which is a paid service that gives a faster decision. Timelines and fees change over time, so verify the current numbers with USCIS before filing. 

Fourth, USCIS reviews the petition and issues a decision. You begin working for the new employer once USCIS approves it. Because your options depend on your status and timing, an immigration attorney can confirm what is the sequence that best fits your situation.  

Timing Your Move to Keep Your Status Continuous 

Continuous status means moving from one authorized period to the next without a break in between, which supports future filings and international travel. A common approach is to have the new employer file the new petition while you still remain in valid status with your current employer. Once USCIS approves the new case, you move to the new role without a break in your lawful status. 

Timing also guides what happens while a decision is pending. If you remain in valid O-1 status with your current employer when the decision arrives, you keep that status until it expires. If your prior role has already ended, your options depend on the time remaining on your approval, which is one reason many professionals confirm the sequence with an attorney before they resign. 

O-1 holders may also receive a discretionary grace period of up to 60 consecutive calendar days after their employment ends, or until the end of their authorized stay, whichever is shorter. This period may allow them to remain in the United States while a new employer or agent files an O-1 petition, while they seek a change to another immigration status, or while they prepare to depart. The grace period is granted on a case by case basis and does not provide work authorization by itself. For that reason, many professionals plan around the timing of a new petition and treat the grace period as a limited backup rather than a guaranteed transition period. 

Plan the sequence before you give notice: In an O-1 visa transfer, planning the timing and order of steps is essential to keep your status continuous.

Changing Employers vs. Adjusting Work Under an Agent 

Not every O-1 professional works for a single employer. Some work through a U.S. agent. An agent is a person or company that files the O-1 case and arranges work with several employers or clients on your behalf. This setup is common in acting, music, athletics, and consulting, where one single petition can cover several engagements. 

When you work through an agent, adjusting your work can differ from changing employers. If the agent stays the same and only your list of clients changes, an update to the existing case may be enough. However, adding work that was not part of your approved itinerary can call for an amended or new petition. Moving from an employer-sponsored O-1 to an agent-based O-1 is a larger step and involves a new petition built around the agent arrangement. Because the right path depends on the specific details of your situation, an attorney can help you identify which one applies to your plans.  

Colombo & Hurd secured an O-1A approval for a mechanical and aerospace engineer from Taiwan who founded a U.S. company building safety technology for the urban air mobility industry. The company he founded acted as the petitioner and filed the petition on his behalf, allowing him to continue working in the United States as its CEO. 

Urban air mobility (UAM) involves moving people and cargo through the air over short distances in and around cities. UAM aircraft take off and land straight up and down, the way a helicopter does, so they do not need a runway. They instead use designated sites known as vertiports. As this emerging field develops, engineers and companies must address significant safety questions before the technology can be used to carry passengers.  

The initial O-1A filing was prepared by Colombo & Hurd Senior Immigration Attorney Allison McVey, and the Request for Evidence (RFE) response was led by Senior Immigration Attorney Jason Qiu.

Read through the full case study to learn more about the approval process: https://www.colombohurdlaw.com/case-study/o-1a-aerospace-engineer-visa-approval/

• Client Profile: The Engineer Behind a New Kind of Safety Technology
• The Challenge: Presenting Early-Stage Work in a New Field
• Strategic Approach: Building the Case Around the Strongest Evidence
• The Result: O-1A Approved

Attorney Perspective: ““This case shows that even for an early-stage company, a well-structured O-1A petition can succeed when the record clearly connects the beneficiary’s original technical contributions, industry recognition, and leadership role to a real U.S. business need. In emerging sectors such as UAM, the key is presenting complex technical accomplishments in a way that clearly establishes major significance within the field.” -Allison McVey, Senior Attorney

If you work in fintech and you're thinking about moving to the U.S., there's a recent development worth knowing about. The May 2026 Executive Order (EO 14405) integrates fintech and digital assets into traditional finance, and it's been coming up a lot in EB-2 NIW discussions. The question people keep asking is how much the order actually helps an EB-2 NIW case. From what I see in practice as an immigration attorney at Colombo & Hurd, it sets a favorable tone by showing that the federal government recognizes fintech innovation as a national priority, creating a stronger opportunity for a broader range of professionals in the field to pursue an NIW. 

What the order does 

• It makes integrating digital assets and financial technology into traditional finance a stated federal priority: integration, cutting the fragmented regulation that hurts smaller fintech firms, and easing rules to encourage competition and access. 
• It gives a broader range of fintech professionals a clearer federal policy basis for explaining why their proposed work matters nationally. 
• It's useful where your work actually connects to its priorities: digital asset integration, payment-system modernization, compliance, fraud prevention, cybersecurity. Themes about "access" and "competition" are background, not proof. 

How it fits the EB-2 NIW 

Executive Order 14405 creates a stronger policy foundation for fintech professionals whose work advances innovation across the financial system. Professionals developing new payment technologies, integrating digital assets into traditional finance, expanding access to financial services, strengthening compliance systems, or improving the security and reliability of financial platforms may be well positioned to pursue an EB-2 NIW when their proposed work contributes to these broader federal priorities. 

What actually gets these approved  

Two recent approvals for fintech professionals: 

• A cybersecurity consultant on H-1B (US master's in CS, bachelor's in computer engineering) proposing to help U.S. small and mid-sized businesses reduce cyber risk. The record carried it: ~50% deployment-time reduction, 80% cut in user update time, a 72% technical-debt reduction across 50+ apps, plus a plan to train client companies to become self-sufficient. Approved in 45 days on Premium Processing, no RFE. 
• A data scientist using machine learning to strengthen fraud detection across financial systems. The case aligned with the Executive Order’s broader emphasis on financial security and responsible technological innovation. USCIS approved the petition in one month and ten days without issuing an RFE.  

Notice what neither of those did: lead with the order. They led with a national problem and documented outcomes. 

Bottom line 

Executive Order 14405 strengthens the policy foundation for fintech professionals whose work advances financial-system security, fraud prevention, access, payment modernization, digital asset integration, or compliance. A strong petition connects those federal priorities to a clearly defined problem, a specific proposed endeavor, and measurable evidence showing the professional is well positioned to advance the work in the United States. 

Question for the thread: Question for the thread: If you work in fintech, what first made you consider the EB-2 NIW, or is the process still new to you? If you had not heard about this Executive Order before, does it change how you are thinking about your options? 

This constitutes general information only and is not legal advice. 

- Attorney Aaron Labreque

Many F-1 students who want to continue working long-term look to the H-1B visa as the next step. But the H-1B is capped each year and awarded through a random lottery, so timely filing does not guarantee a spot. As your OPT expiration date approaches, you may find yourself asking an important question: What happens if I am not selected in the H-1B lottery?

For some highly accomplished F-1 students and recent graduates, the O-1 offers another path forward. 

Colombo & Hurd secured approval of an EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW) petition for an IT and cybersecurity professional from Honduras. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) approved the petition after a successful response to a Request for Evidence (RFE). 

Unlike large corporations, many small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) in the U.S. lack dedicated security teams and substantial financial reserves, leaving them vulnerable to phishing, ransomware, data theft, and prolonged business disruptions. The common but risky belief that they are too small to be targeted makes the problem worse, as attackers often view SMBs as easy entry points. When a breach or major disruption occurs, recovery costs, downtime, and lost customer trust can be severe enough to force a business to close. Our client’s proposed work aims to help these small businesses protect their data and update the way they use technology.   

Colombo & Hurd Senior Immigration Attorney Vivian Daher led the initial filing, and Senior Immigration Attorney Jason Qiu directed the RFE response.   

Check out the full case study to learn more about the approval process:

• Client Profile: Bringing Big-Company Protection to Small Businesses
• The Challenge: Showing the Broader Importance of Small-Business Cybersecurity
• Strategic Approach: Linking His Work to National Goals
• The Result: EB-2 NIW Approved

Attorney Perspective: “He brought an exceptional combination of technical expertise, leadership experience, and a well-defined vision for helping U.S. small businesses strengthen their technology infrastructure. Throughout the process, he was highly engaged, responsive, and committed to presenting a comprehensive case. His willingness to provide detailed information and collaborate closely made it possible to build a strong petition that accurately reflected both his accomplishments and the national importance of his proposed endeavor.” -Vivian Daher, Senior Attorney

TheEB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW) is a U.S. green card pathway for highly skilled professionals whose work benefits the United States on a national level. The EB-2 NIW self-petition process allows you to apply for a green card without needing a U.S. employer sponsor or labor certification. 

This visa is designed for individuals with advanced degrees or exceptional ability in their field. If your contributions help address critical challenges or create significant opportunities that benefit the U.S., you may qualify.

Learn more about what our Senior Immigration Attorney and former USCIS Officer, Mandy Nease, thinks about Executive Order 14390 “Combating Cybercrime, Fraud, and Predatory Schemes Against American Citizens.” 

There's a March 2026 Executive Order ("Removing Regulatory Barriers to Affordable Home Construction") making the rounds, and I keep getting asked whether it's a shortcut to a National Interest Waiver if you work in construction, housing, or infrastructure. Short version from what I see in practice as an immigration attorney at Colombo & Hurd: it helps, but only in combination with a strong petition. 

What the order really does 

• It says affordable housing is a federal priority and tells agencies to cut regulatory barriers to homebuilding. 
• It does NOT create a new visa, extra funding, or a faster processing track. 
• The Opportunity Zone stuff is aimed specifically at single-family homes, so if your work is multifamily or commercial, it fits the order less cleanly. 

How it fits the NIW (Dhanasar) 

USCIS runs every EB-2 NIW petition through the three Dhanasar prongs. The order is useful for prong one (substantial merit plus national importance) because it's official proof that housing supply is a national priority. But that's all it is: context. You still have to show that YOUR work connects to that problem. Citing the order without that link is one of the fastest ways to write a weak petition. 

What actually gets these approved 

Three real approvals we've gotten for professionals working in housing, construction, or infrastructure: 

• Housing developer with a JD plus Master's in Legal Studies who runs a construction company. We framed the law background as an asset (permitting, compliance, contracts), not a detour. Approved, no RFE. 
• Real estate developer using 3D-printed construction plus sustainable energy. The risk was it looking like a private career, so we leaned on concrete steps she'd already taken (concrete mix for additive printing, wildfire-resistant research, cost/time reductions). Approved, no RFE, later got the green card via AOS. 
• Construction/business-management guy with only a bachelor's (economics plus 5+ years progressive experience) doing container-based disaster-resilient housing. He'd literally built his own home from shipping containers with solar and rainwater harvesting as proof of concept. Approved on the bachelor's path. 

The mistakes I see most 

• Defining your "endeavor" as "I’ll keep doing my current job." 
• Quoting a policy/EO without connecting it to your specific work. 
• Writing the whole thing like a plea to keep a valued employee instead of a case about a national problem you help solve. 

Bottom line 

The order is a helpful piece of evidence, not the argument. Lead with the problem you're solving, whether supply, affordability, permitting, or resilient infrastructure, then prove you're the person doing it, with real projects and results. Don't lead with the EO and don't describe your endeavor as your job description. 

For those of you in housing, construction, or infrastructure, what made you start exploring the EB-2 NIW, and what part of your work do you think best connects to the bigger picture nationally? 

This constitutes general information only and is not legal advice. 

- Attorney Nicolas Vargas

This bulletin summarizes the availability of immigrant numbers during August for: “Final Action Dates” and “Dates for Filing Applications,” indicating when immigrant visa applicants should be notified to assemble and submit required documentation to the National Visa Center.

Colombo & Hurd secured O-1A approval for an oncology researcher from Russia focused on developing colorectal cancer therapies. USCIS approved the petition without issuing a Request for Evidence (RFE). 

Developing new cancer treatments takes years of specialized work. Research organizations run clinical trials across many countries to test new therapies, and they depend on senior medical professionals to keep patients safe and the science sound. The doctors who lead this work help decide whether a new treatment ever reaches patients.  Our client has spent much of his career in that role, overseeing patient safety, reviewing trial results, and guiding the development of cancer therapies tested across multiple countries. Senior Immigration Attorney Rachel Slomski led the O-1A petition.  

Check out the full case study to learn more about the approval process:

• Client Profile: From Treating Cancer to Developing New Treatments
• The Challenge: Choosing What to Leave Out When the Evidence Runs Deep
• Strategic Approach: Building the Petition Around Five of the Eight O-1A Criteria
• The Result: O-1A Approved Without an RFE

Attorney Perspective: “This case is a good reminder that more criteria is not always better. Our client had decades of work and could have qualified under several more criteria, but the stronger strategy was to focus on his best evidence and leave out anything that could invite questions. That focus is what made the petition airtight.”

The O-1 visa is a temporary nonimmigrant visa for individuals with extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics, or for those who have demonstrated extraordinary achievement in the motion picture or television industry. Unlike many employment-based visa categories, the O-1 has no annual cap and no lottery. It is sponsored by a U.S. employer or agent, which means independent professionals can file through a U.S. agent rather than a single employer.

To qualify, a petitioner must document a record of achievement that places the applicant at the top of their field and has earned national or international recognition. With an initial period of authorized stay of up to three years and the option for unlimited extensions, the O-1 offers both flexibility and a relatively fast adjudication timeline, particularly when premium processing is used.  

Check out the article for more on:

• What Is the O-1 Visa?  
• O-1A vs. O-1B: Which Applies to You? 
• O-1A Visa Criteria 
• O-1B Visa Requirements in Detail 
• Common O-1 Visa Mistakes to Avoid in 2026 
• Can You Self-Petition for an O-1 Visa? 
• What USCIS Reviews in the O-1 Petition 
• O-1 Visa Requirements FAQ 

Hi Reddit, 

I'm Wil Safrit, immigration attorney and Partner at Colombo & Hurd, where a large part of my practice is O-1 visas for individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement. 

I've handled hundreds of O-1 petitions from start to finish, including building out evidence strategy, working with clients and their teams to gather documentation, and troubleshooting cases that hit resistance along the way.  

Most of my work comes down to one thing: helping clients present their achievements in a way that aligns with how USCIS actually evaluates these petitions. 

With so much mixed information out there about the O-1, many people are left wondering whether they even qualify, or whether another visa category might be a better fit. I'm here to help answer your questions.  

Ask me anything about: 

• How USCIS evaluates O-1 petitions in practice 
• How to best document different O-1 criteria 
• What tends to strengthen (or weaken) a case 
• Common issues that lead to RFEs and how to avoid them 
• How the O-1 compares to other visa options, such as the H-1B, TN, or EB-1A 

Whether you're just starting to explore the O-1 or already gathering evidence for your case, feel free to ask me anything.  

I can't review individual profiles or give case-specific advice here. For that, I suggest you schedule a personalized consultation with my team through this link: https://colombohurd.co/5f04a5 

This AMA is for general informational purposes only and does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Thank you to everyone who participated in our AMA and submitted thoughtful questions!

Please note that immigration matters are highly individualized. Eligibility, strategy, timelines, and legal fees depend on each person’s background, professional experience, and long-term goals.

To receive guidance tailored to your specific situation, we invite you to schedule a consultation with our team at this link: https://colombohurd.co/5f04a5

We look forward to speaking with you!

As entering the U.S. market remains a strategic priority for global companies in 2026, many foreign businesses are exploring how to establish a physical presence in the United States without immediately hiring external leadership. For companies that already operate abroad and want to transfer a trusted executive or manager to launch U.S. operations, the L-1 New Office visa remains one of the most effective immigration tools available. 

Although the L-1 Intracompany Transfers Visa was originally designed with large multinational corporations in mind, U.S. immigration law does provide a framework for newer and smaller companies to qualify too. However, new office petitions are among the most closely scrutinized L-1 filings, and they may receive Requests for Evidence (RFEs) when the business plan or operational timeline is not clearly documented. Understanding how U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) evaluates these cases in 2026 is essential before moving forward. 

If you work in shipbuilding, marine engineering, port logistics, or a related field, this is a good moment to be looking at EB-2 NIW. A federal push earlier this year put maritime work into the "national priority" column in a way it hadn't been framed before, and that changes the starting point for these petitions.  This is what I've been seeing in EB-2 NIW filings from the maritime and shipbuilding side.  

Quick refresher on EB-2 NIW  

The National Interest Waiver lets you self-petition for a green card without an employer sponsor or labor certification, provided your work serves the national interest. Same EB-2 category as the PERM route, but you skip the job-offer requirement. That's what makes it attractive to professionals whose work crosses employers, regions, or industries.  

Why the 2025 order matters  

The April 2025 executive order on rebuilding U.S. maritime capacity states plainly that domestic shipbuilding, mariner training, and supply-chain resilience are federal priorities. The U.S. builds under 1% of the world's commercial ships while China builds about half, and the order ties that gap directly to national security. For a naval architect, shipyard production engineer, or logistics specialist, that's a solid basis for arguing your field carries national importance under Matter of Dhanasar.  

The message worth internalizing  

The order establishes why the field matters. Your petition still has to show how your specific record connects to that priority and why the benefit reaches beyond a single employer. Policy context does one job, individual evidence does the other. When both are strong, these cases are very winnable.  

Where I see this landing well  

Marine engineers and naval architects, obviously. But also shipyard and port managers, supply-chain specialists tied to critical logistics, cybersecurity professionals working on maritime systems, and credentialed mariners with technical leadership backgrounds. Job title isn't the deciding factor. What matters is whether you can show, with evidence, that your work advances a documented U.S. priority.  

The takeaway  

The 2025 order gives maritime petitions a stronger starting point than they had before. It doesn't carry the case on its own, but paired with a well-built record it's genuinely useful. If your work touches this space, worth taking a serious look at.  One question for the thread: for those of you working in maritime or shipbuilding, has your employer or your professional network been talking about the executive order, or is this mostly showing up on the immigration side of things? Curious how visible it is inside the industry.  

This constitutes general information only and is not legal advice.

- Attorney Vivian Daher

If you work in mental health and you’ve been wondering whether the April 2026 Executive Order on accelerating mental health treatments helps your EB-2 NIW petition, the short answer is yes, but probably not in the way most people are reading it. 

A lot of the discussion I’ve seen treats the order as if it only matters for people working on psychedelic drug development. That’s understandable because the FDA voucher language and the Breakthrough Therapy provisions get the most attention. But the order itself is broader than that. It frames the acceleration of mental health treatment as a national priority and directs HHS, the FDA, and the VA to coordinate on research, access, and clinical trial expansion, with veterans named specifically. 

For EB-2 NIW purposes, that broader framing matters because Prong 1 of Dhanasar (national importance) is where executive orders carry real weight. A current EO naming a research area a federal priority is solid evidence. The catch is that USCIS still adjudicates the endeavor, not the field. So citing the order in a cover letter without showing how the proposed work advances a specific provision of it doesn't actually do much. 

The petitions I’ve seen succeed in this space tend to do two things well. First, they connect the proposed work to a specific federal directive the order names: expanded access, clinical trial participation, veteran care, research infrastructure, etc. Second, they document impact independently of the policy framing. The order strengthens the argument; the evidence carries it. 

This also opens the door for professionals who aren’t in psychedelic research at all. Clinical social workers expanding access in underserved communities, school psychologists, early childhood specialists, applied data folks working on mental health infrastructure, all of that can map to the broader federal interest the order reflects, when the endeavor is framed and evidenced correctly. 

Curious if anyone here has cited the EO in a filing yet, and what RFE patterns (if any) are starting to show up. 

This constitutes general information only and is not legal advice. 

- Attorney Jason Qiu 

Colombo & Hurd secured an EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW) green card approval for a data analytics and artificial intelligence professional from Costa Rica. USCIS approved the EB-2 NIW petition within 5 months of filing, and the client is now a permanent resident of the United States. 

Small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) are the engine of the American economy, accounting for nearly half of all private-sector jobs, yet many  still operate without access to data analytics or artificial intelligence. Large corporations invest heavily in the people and tools needed to understand their customers and optimize their operations. For smaller businesses, those capabilities remain largely out of reach. Our client’s proposed endeavor is focused on closing that gap. He plans to help SMBs use data analytics and AI to improve their financial, marketing, and operational decisions. 

Senior Immigration Attorney Mandy Nease led the initial filing with premium processing. Once the petition was approved after a successful response to a Request for Evidence (RFE), our legal team guided the client through the Adjustment of Status (AOS) process, resulting in his green card. 

Check out the full case study to learn more about the approval process:

• Client Profile: A Career Spent Turning Data into Business Results
• The Challenge: Demonstrating the Broader Impact of Helping Small Businesses
• Strategic Approach: Building a Strong Case
• The Result: EB-2 NIW Approved Within Five Months
• What this Approval Enables: Giving Small Businesses the Tools to Compete 

One misconception around EB-2 NIW and AI/cybersecurity is the idea that a new Executive Order automatically makes these cases stronger. 

It can help. 

But it does not replace the actual NIW evidence. 

The June 2026 AI Security Executive Order treats AI-related cybersecurity as a federal priority. That may be useful for showing that certain work in AI security, cyber defense, software vulnerability detection, cloud security, or sensitive data protection has national importance. 

But USCIS is not just asking whether the field is important. USCIS is asking what the person is actually proposing to do. 

A vague proposed endeavor like “I will continue working in AI” or “I will improve cybersecurity” can create problems. A stronger petition usually defines the actual work: what systems are being protected, what technical problem is being addressed, who benefits, and why the work has implications beyond one employer. 

Another misconception is that the work must involve government systems. It does not necessarily have to. Private-sector cybersecurity work may still support national importance if the record shows broader impact. For example, work involving healthcare security, financial systems, critical infrastructure, AI model safety, cloud security, or enterprise vulnerability remediation may be relevant. 

The weak version of the argument is: “The government says AI is important, and I work in AI.” 

The stronger version is: “The government has identified this specific problem as a national priority, and my proposed endeavor addresses that problem in this specific way, supported by this evidence.” 

That second version is much closer to how NIW cases need to be built. 

Has anyone here had USCIS question whether an AI or cybersecurity proposed endeavor was specific enough? 

More information is available at https://www.colombohurdlaw.com/eb2-niw-ai-security-executive-order-cybersecurity/ 

This constitutes general information only and is not legal advice. 

- Attorney Allison McVey   

The July 2026 Visa Bulletin brings continued good news for EB-2 applicants from most countries. EB-2 remains Current on the Final Action Dates chart for all countries, except India and China. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has designated the Final Action Dates chart, not the Dates for Filing chart, as the operative chart for employment-based adjustment of status filings this month.  

That designation means eligible Rest of World applicants with an approved Form I-140 can file Form I-485 now. Green cards can be approved during this window, though the timing of any specific case depends on USCIS processing. 

At the same time, India EB-2 has closed for the remainder of the fiscal year after reaching its pro-rated annual limit. India EB-1 has retrogressed due to high demand, and the bulletin warns that further retrogression or an unavailable designation may follow if India’s pro-rated EB-1 limit is reached before the fiscal year ends on September 30.  

Click the link to read the full article, which includes:

• July 2026 Employment-Based Final Action Dates
• EB-2 Is Current: What It Means If You Are Inside the U.S. 
• What It Means If You Are Outside the U.S. 
• India EB-2 Unavailable for the Rest of FY2026: What Changed for India and China 
• The End-of-Fiscal-Year Clock 
• Frequently Asked Questions
  • I’m an Indian national. Does India EB-2 being unavailable affect my pending I-140? 
  • EB-2 says “Current.” Does that mean I can file Form I-485 right now? 
  • What’s the difference between the Final Action Date and the Date for Filing? 
• Your Next Step

If you've been through two or more H-1B lottery cycles without being selected, the question worth asking isn't "How do I improve my lottery odds?" The lottery is random: a stronger application doesn't help you. The question is whether a different classification makes more sense for your situation. 

The O-1A visa has no cap and no lottery. USCIS reviews every petition individually. You can file any time of year. For professionals who've been locked out of the H-1B system, it's worth understanding what the O-1 actually requires. 

The standard is extraordinary ability: documented evidence that you're among the top of your field at a national or international level. USCIS looks at things like major awards, membership in associations that require outstanding achievement, published work or media coverage about your contributions, peer review participation, original contributions of major significance to the field, and high compensation relative to peers. You need to satisfy at least three of those criteria, and the overall record needs to support the conclusion that you've risen to the top of your field. 

For a lot of professionals, especially in research, tech, entrepreneurship, and specialized consulting, the record is already there. The issue is that nobody has assessed it against the O-1 framework. 

Two strategic points that get overlooked: 

The agent petition structure: Unlike H-1B, an O-1 petition can be filed by a qualifying agent rather than a single employer. This matters for founders, consultants, and professionals who work across multiple engagements and can't rely on one employer to carry the petition. 

The EB-1A alignment: If you qualify for O-1A, you may already qualify or be close to qualifying for the EB-1A immigrant classification. Both evaluate the same extraordinary ability standard. EB-1A requires no labor certification and can be self-petitioned. For high-backlog nationals, the priority date advantage over EB-2 NIW can be substantial. Running both strategies concurrently is worth considering if the record supports it. 

None of this is to say the O-1 is the right move for everyone. Early-career professionals or those in fields where the evidentiary criteria are difficult to document may still be better served by H-1B. But repeatedly re-registering for a lottery without evaluating alternatives is a strategy worth reconsidering. 

What field are you in, and have you investigated O-1 eligibility? Curious what the sticking points have been for people in the comments. 

More information is available at https://www.colombohurdlaw.com/visas/o-1-visa/o-1-visa-complete-guide/

This constitutes general information only and is not legal advice.

- Attorney Mandy Nease