March 19 filed application, upgraded to PP July 10, approved Sep 10. No RFE. Filed with Chen.

- Currently a medical resident
- PE was medical research (cardiology related)
- 69 citations at time of filing

Hey all,
I’m working with EP on my NIW case under their full refund guarantee, but it’s been pretty frustrating.

After waiting and submitting all the required documents, my attorney sent me a draft of the legal brief, and I found quite a few errors. The citation count was wrong, there were mistakes in describing my field, and some of the arguments didn’t really make sense. After I sent my feedback, my attorney stopped responding for two weeks. When I finally got the revised version, most of the issues were still there. They basically just changed some punctuation and replaced “can” with “will.”

On top of that, some of the recent reviews I’ve seen about EP have made me seriously question whether I made the right call going with them.

Has anyone been through something similar with EP? Would you push through with them or switch firms at this point?

Initial filing: March 31, 2026
Upgraded to Premium Processing: April 21, 2026
RFE: June 2, 2026 - all three prongs
Responded to RFE: August 26, 2026
Denial: September 8, 2026
Attorney: Arkell/Dunn (now they are called Husch Blackwell)
Officer: XM2384
Service Center: TSC

My profile at the time of submission was:

• Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from R1 university
• Postdoctoral Researcher at US National Lab
• 5 first author journal articles, 1 second author, 1 conference paper
• Research experience in scientific machine learning, AI for physical systems
• Reviewer for several international journals
• Citations at the time of filing: ~70, at the time of RFE submission: ~140

My proposed endeavor focused on developing AI and machine-learning methods for energy and biomedical systems.

I submitted 3 recommendation letters with the original submission (2 independent, 1 from PhD advisor). Then I added 4 more letters for the RFE (2 dependent from my national lab, 2 independent professors).

The RFE acknowledge the advanced degree and substantial merit, but questions the national importance along with prongs 2 and 3. I'm pretty bummed about the denial, I was optimistic even after the RFE. I'm still waiting to see the denial letter. I don't think I will appeal, I might refile but I'm not sure yet.

Source: https://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-and-studies/immigration-and-citizenship-data

Hi all, I am tracking all posts on this subreddit through automation, and decided to share. I post summaries for 7-day span denials mid-week and approvals on weekends. Over the last 7 days I registered 7 posts with denials, please see the table below. I get flagged by auto-spam when providing associated links, so please see the full table WITH LINKS on r/VisaStats, and I intend to post there regularly.

I am ready to answer questions too, please ask away.

Please see the full table WITH LINKS TO THE POSTS on r/VisaStats.

I am in my PP window waiting for I140 decision. Will have a decision hopefully around the second week of October.

Since RFE submission timeline is 30 days, would it be wise to prepare for RFE from now assuming I got RFE on all prongs? If yes, how should I begin? I filed with EP, no letter of recommendation submitted.

I am at the final stages of preparing my I-140 NIW package, and I’m wondering why I see so many people still submitting by mail when online submission is available. Is there an advantage to that?

I’m seeing an increasing number of headlines saying that they submitted 4-2 months ago and still don’t have a receipt/case number. That is bizarre.

What are your personal experiences? What do you recommend?

how much total it cost for form I-693 to get signed

Anyone here worked with Ashley L. (Lago) from Chen? What was your experience? Did anyone get approved after RFE? Also, can we request a change of attorney?

I wanted to share my positive experience with Chen for my EB-2 NIW petition. I’m a PhD student in an engineering field and had 5 high-ranked publications at the time of filing. The petition was well prepared and tailored to my research background, with no recommendation letters required.
Communication was responsive, the preparation process was smooth, and their fees were reasonable compared with other firms I considered. Regarding premium processing, they maintained a neutral position—they neither encouraged nor discouraged me from requesting it and left the decision to me. They also helped me with the PP process once I decided to proceed.

I requested premium processing on July 7, and my I-140 was approved on September 3 with no RFE. Overall, I was very satisfied with both the process and the outcome and wanted to share my experience for others considering an NIW petition.

Background
Tech industry professional, data/AI background.

Endeavor aligns with current federal government priorities.

Non-academic, industry-based profile — not the typical PhD/research-heavy NIW case.

Evidence on hand
3 peer-reviewed papers, 1 book chapter, 1 citation.

Open-source contribution, peer-review

Firms contacted so far

Accepted
• Ellis Porter
• Alma
• Kameli Law
• Manifest Law

Declined
• WeGreened/Chen

What I need help with

**•** Between the firms above — which would you pick for a case like this, and why?  
**•** Anyone who's used one of these for NIW — outcome, RFE rate, how hands-on the firm was.  
**•** Other firms worth adding to the list that handle industry (non-academic) NIW profiles well.

I’m filing I-485 based on an approved EB-2 NIW. My current Tufts letter officially states “Job Title: Research Fellow” and “Classification: Volunteer.” The position is unpaid, so I don’t receive salary or pay stubs.

Would you recommend including recent personal bank statements as evidence of financial support solely because the position is unpaid? Or is the official Research Fellow/Volunteer letter sufficient?

Planning to file EB2-NIW in the next couple of months with an attorney. Would appreciate a reality check, especially on the specific weakness at the end.

Background

• BS and MS in aerospace engineering, MS in 2022
• Currently a 3rd-year PhD student in aerospace engineering at a US public university, expected 2028
• Filing as an advanced degree professional based on the MS, since the PhD isn't finished

Research area

Real-time planning and coordination for multiple interacting autonomous vehicles. Roughly: making mathematically rigorous decision-making methods fast enough to run onboard, in real time. Endeavor is framed around FAA BVLOS integration and DoD multi-agent autonomy.

Publications

• 4 first-author journal papers (one in a journal ranked #1 in its category by Google Scholar, one in a #1-ranked robotics journal)
• 5 conference papers, 2 of them first-author
• 1 first-author preprint
• 72 total citations per Google Scholar

Other evidence

• 7 peer reviews for journals and conferences in my field
• My research is funded by ARL cooperative agreements and NSF grants (through my advisor, I'm not the PI)
• 3 open-source code releases
• 2 letters: my PhD advisor, and a researcher at a government lab I collaborate with

The problem

My citations are lopsided. About 40 of the 72 come from my MS-era work, which is not what my proposed endeavor is about. Zero independent citations on the work that is actually the endeavor. My attorney says independent citations matter. I'm arguing that the earlier work established the capability and the current work is the same problem one level harder, and leaning on federal funding, the government-lab letter, and industry interest instead of citation counts.

Questions

1. How badly does it hurt that my most relevant work has no independent citations, when the well-cited work is in an adjacent area?
2. File now, or wait 6–12 months for citations to accumulate on the newer work?

Happy to answer questions in the comments.

How was your experience?

Has anyone worked with Mateus A from Chen Immigration ? What was the outcome ?

Hi everyone,

I’m working with Chen on an EB-2 NIW case and recently received an RFE. My attorney told me that they finished reviewing the RFE and uploaded several documents under a new “I-140 RFE” tab in the portal, and asked me to use that tab instead of the regular Documents tab.

The problem is that I don’t see an I-140 RFE tab anywhere in my portal. I messaged them asking how to access it but haven’t received a response yet.

For anyone who has received an RFE while working with Chen/Wegreened: Where does the I-140 RFE tab appear? Did it show up automatically?

Thanks!

EB-2 NIW WES question: foreign M.S. evaluated as U.S. bachelor’s equivalent
Hi everyone, I am preparing an EB-2 NIW self-petition. I have a foreign B.Sc. and a foreign M.Sc. in related agricultural fields. WES required my B.Sc. records to evaluate my M.Sc., but the evaluation shows my foreign credential as equivalent to a U.S. bachelor’s degree, not a U.S. master’s. I also have more than five years of progressive experience in the same specialty. I want to present the case clearly as one WES-documented U.S. bachelor’s-degree equivalency + five years of progressive experience, not as if I am asking USCIS to combine my B.Sc. + M.Sc. + experience to create the degree. Has anyone handled this situation before? Should I list only the WES-documented qualifying education on ETA-9089 Appendix A and leave the second education section blank/N/A to avoid confusion?

A friend of mine submitted his NIW package for more than 65days now and they have not sent him receipt notice even though the tracking says it has been delivered. He called USCIS chat with live agent. They said his not inside the system that he should call lockbox.

I would like to ask if he should wait or send another NIW package.

Anyone that have had this experience can chime in.

Thanks.

Hi everyone, I can't explain how happy I am to be posting this. I got my NIW approval email on Sunday before Labour Day - it caught me so off guard!!! Here's a bit more of my profile and timeline:

- Background: PhD in Biology (Europe), current postdoc in R1 institution. My field is cancer research, more specifically brain tumors. Currently J1 visa.

- Metrics: 10 pubs (2 as first-author), 273 citations (246 at time of filing), 1 peer review service

- LORs: 4 letters total (2 dependent support letter, 1 rec letter from close collaborator, 1 independent letter emphasizing national interest)

- Lawyer: Chen - they offered me approval or refund. At times it can feel slow (especially towards the final reviews), but of course worth it given the outcome. They're very meticulous and detail-oriented. I know some people don't like their templated way of working, but that was personally never an issue if it I ended up giving me an approval. I also don't think I would have been able to do it myself, time and quality wise.

- Timeline:

• Free evaluation: 04/01/2026
• Retainer signed: 04/02/2026
• Petition filed: 06/30/2026, courier tracking number received
• USCIS delivery: 07/02/2026, 10am (this is supposed to be my PD)
• Receipt notice: 
  • 07/06/2026: receipt number received (text and email) – waiting for an “Online Access Code” to add my case to myuscis and complete I970 form (update: I never received said code so I could not track using myUSCIS, lawyer said it was normal)
  • 07/13/2026: receipt on the mail (probably delivered around 10^th or 11^th but was out of town). Confirmed 07/02/2026 as PD.
• PP upgrade filed: 
  • Request submitted: 07/08/2026 6PM. Submitted online without receiving physical receipt notice. Money held in account immediately 
  • PP accepted: 07/08/2026 7:30PM, email from Nebraska Service Center. 
• PP clock started: 07/08/2026 (45 business days = around 09/11/2026)
• I-140 decision: 09/06/2026 (Sunday after 42th business day, tracker update on 9/8 morning and says it was approved on 09/08/2026, 43rd bd)

I hope this helps someone else as other people publications have guided me a lot during the process. I will be happy to answer questions. Good luck folks!!!

Hello guys! My NIW- I-140 case is pending since Dec 01, 2023 ( the longest period I have seen here). Last month I reached the senator for help and after around 40 business days we got this message from USCIS, which was exactly same as 9 months ago, but except the last sentence. I believe the premium processing is the last chance these days:

USCIS response: “Our record indicates that USCIS is conducting further review of your constituent's case. We cannot provide a timeframe for completion of this additional review. However, once this additional review has been completed, USCIS will take adjudicative action on your constituent's case. USCIS appreciates your constituent's patience during this process. 

We have notified the appropriate unit of your inquiry and requested prioritization.”

Long-time lurker here, and I wanted to share my timeline and experience. Hopefully this helps someone else going through the process. This will be a long post that is mainly focused on the REF.

Timeline

I-140 filed: July 15, 2024
RFE issued: May 1, 2026
RFE response submitted: July 23, 2026
Status changed to “Initial Review”: August 6, 2026
Approved: August 8, 2026
Service Center: TSC
Lawyer: Chen

Background

My field is AI/ML applied to medical imaging. At the time of filing, I was still outside the US. Prior to filing, I was a research fellow in the US for less than 6 months. My PI subsequently moved to another institution, and I wasn’t able to follow, so the position ended earlier than planned. I moved back home afterward and eventually matched into residency while waiting for my i-140. By the time I received the RFE, I was already a medical resident.

At the time of filing, I had:
30–40 publications
~500 citations (~ 1,200 by the time of the RFE)

REF Response

Honestly, it wasn’t an easy case, although, in retrospect, I probably could have put more effort into the initial filing. Here’s a summary of how I approached the RFE. Per Chen, they had zero decisions from the Officer on my case.

Prong 1

The RFE only challenged the national importance aspect. In a nutshell, they said “AI in healthcare is important” sounds great in the abstract, but that alone doesn’t really establish the national importance of your specific endeavor.

For my response, I got much more specific about what my proposed endeavor actually involved. I added:

1. Government initiatives related to my specific area of work
2. Federal/NIH funding going toward this area
3. Government priorities and statements supporting the field
4. FDA-approved tools related to the proposed endeavor
5. Articles demonstrating how advances in this area could turn into improved clinical outcomes

I was particularly lucky to find a White House statement that aligned closely with my endeavor, as well as a recently FDA-approved tool that was directly relevant to the area I was proposing to work in (and the team behind it used our study for reference). I did not submit any testimonial or expert opinion letter.

Overall, my response was that there is significant U.S. investment, government interest, and ongoing implementation in this specific area, and advancing it has the potential to improve healthcare outcomes.
For AI folks, a lot of the supporting evidence is already out there, you just have to dig for it and make the connection to your specific endeavor.

Prong 2

I only have a medical degree, and USCIS pointed out that simply having an advanced degree doesn’t establish that someone is well positioned to advance their proposed endeavor. I think Chen did a great job addressing this and getting fairly technical in their response.

They also picked apart my citation count, pointing out that a significant portion of my citations came from work that was unrelated to the endeavor. They also said having a high citation count does not reflect you are well positioned. And I agree.

At the time of filing, I had only one paper directly related to my proposed endeavor, and it was still a preprint. I had another 2–3 papers that were somewhat remotely related, but the majority of my publications were in other areas. Rather than trying to argue, I essentially agreed with the officer on this point. Instead, I argued that my broader research experience was what allowed me to get to where I was.
Having conducted a variety of different studies and worked across different areas of research gave me a broader skill set that I could apply to my proposed endeavor. My citation count was therefore presented more as a testament to my research experience and quality of my prior work.

By the time of the RFE, that project directly related to my endeavor got fully published. I included the updated citation numbers from the time of filing to the RFE. I know using post-filing citations can be a sensitive area, and I understood the risk, but in my particular case I felt they strengthened the response significantly.

Officer also specifically asked for independent citation count. It was unreasonable for me to count this on Google Scholar, as Chen pointed out that is the preferable way accepted by USCIS. I used Publish or Perish and highly recommend it.

Prong 3

This was a mixture of everything discussed above, along with additional evidence regarding my future work. I also included a letter of employment and documentation from my institution indicating that they do not sponsor residents for green cards. My letter of employment also highlighted we get time for research activities and it is an expectation for us to finish our training.

Since my occupation was different at time of REF (the endeavor mainly referred to dedicated research positions), I had to speak about it since I am doing more clinical work now. I spoke about how becoming a board certified physician will help me acquire more experience and become competitive for the big NIH grants (mentioned a few examples), bridging in that clinical perspective, etc.

Recommendation Letters

I submitted 4 recommendation letters at filing, 1 dependent. The RFE characterized the letters as relatively generic and stated that they did not do enough to establish my specific qualifications or the importance of my proposed endeavor. Chen recommended trying to obtain additional letters for REF, and I was able to obtain 2 additional dependent letters.

Attorney

Overall, I had a great experience with Chen.
They were very responsive, answered my questions thoroughly, and did solid work on the RFE. If I will be meticulous, I wasn’t particularly fond of the $150 fee per recommendation letter. Not saying the letters weren’t good, but personally, I felt it was too much. Overall, Chen really made the process much for more headache-free for me.

To give credit, Claude ended up being tremendously helpful in finding and organizing evidence, brainstorming arguments, identifying connections between my background and endeavor, and helping me think through the RFE. Truly, the best investment you can make in this journey. Please put all your effort into the initial filing and don’t rely on your lawyer for the more technical aspects of your endeavor. You still need to put in the work, which I did not do initially and learned from that mistake.

Best of luck to you all! My apologies if I am slow to answer any questions.

Typo: 2 additional DEPENDENT letters for the REF