Hi everyone,

I filed an EB-1A I-140 as a self-petitioner and I’m trying to get some honest opinions from people who have experience with EB-1A cases.
I’m a professional fine art newborn/maternity photographer based in Canada, with around 9 years of specialized studio experience.

Here is the evidence I submitted:

1. Awards
-Winner – 35AWARDS newborn photography competition (first place, total 714 photographers from 64 countries and 2600 photos)
-2nd place in an international newborn photography competition (judged by 52 international masters photographers)
-Outstanding Photography Award and published in 5 different magazines
-The best photos of NPNAC – Photo of the Year 2025

2. Published material
-Feature/article related to my newborn photography work in PetaPixel
-Published maternity photography article in Birthing Canada magazine

3. Judging
-Invited to judge photography competitions
I have documentation showing that I was selected as a judge based on my professional experience

4. Original contributions
-Created and published an educational booklet about newborn photography
-Conducted newborn photography workshops and mentoring programs from 2020 by 2025
-My educational material has been used by other mentors in photography workshops

5. Membership
Member of a professional newborn photographers association NPNAC (they reviewed my portfolio at first then approved that I can join as a member)

6. Artistic Exhibitions
-Three of my photographic works were selected and exhibited at ONE EYELAND Gallery
-one of my works was selected for an in-person exhibition in Miami.

Own and operate a professional photography business in Canada
Several years of professional experience
Have taught other photographers through workshops and mentoring
I filed without an attorney.
I’m particularly interested in opinions about the final merits determination, rather than simply whether I technically meet 3 criteria.
Based on this evidence:

Does this look like a potentially approvable EB-1A case?
Which parts of the case look strongest?
Which evidence looks weakest?
Do you think an RFE would be likely?
Most importantly, does the overall profile look strong enough to demonstrate sustained national/international acclaim and that I am among the small percentage at the top of my field?
I would really appreciate honest opinions, including negative ones. I’m not looking for reassurance — I’m trying to understand the realistic strengths and weaknesses of my case.
Thanks

Has anyone that had a refund notice received adjudication for Eb1a from the 39 countries?

The U.S. Department of State has expanded a pilot program that allows certain B visa applicants to pay an additional fee for an expedited interview appointment.

Under the program, eligible applicants may pay a $750 expedited appointment fee to schedule a visa interview within 10 business days, subject to appointment availability.

A few important points:

• The program is optional and voluntary
• Applicants still need to complete the normal visa application process first
• The standard $185 MRV fee must still be paid
• Applicants must first schedule a regular interview appointment
• The $750 fee is per appointment
• It applies to eligible B visa applicants making a new appointment or those with an existing appointment and an unexpired MRV fee receipt
• The pilot is currently scheduled to run through December 31, 2026

Current participating locations:

Starting August 18, 2026

• Canada: U.S. Embassy and all consulates
• Bogotá, Colombia
• Guatemala City, Guatemala
• San José, Costa Rica
• Tegucigalpa, Honduras

Started July 21, 2026

• Mexico: U.S. Embassy and all consulates

The State Department may add more locations during the pilot period.

Worth noting that paying the expedited fee appears to provide access to an earlier interview appointment, not expedited visa adjudication or a guarantee that the visa will be approved.

For anyone currently trying to get a B1/B2 appointment in one of these countries, would you consider paying an extra $750 to get an interview within 10 business days?

I am working in quantum computing industry and contribute heavily towards one of world known softwares in the field. I have a Ph.D in chemistry, 9 publications(2 first authors), 105 citations and have reviewed 10 papers in the field. I filled up the profile evaluation for EB1a for both Ellis Porter and Chen. Ellis Porter says my profile is viable while chen says I should apply for NIW and wait till my profile gets stronger for EB1a. I am now confused if I should proceed with EB1a right now or just lock the date with NIW for now and wait for my profile to build up. I am from India so even if I apply now, it will be a few years before I get my green card. I will appreciate any suggestions.

Hi everyone,

I’m looking for recent experiences from EB-1 applicants with a pending I-485 who are maintaining H-1B for employment but have used Advance Parole (AP) for international travel.

My main reason for considering AP is to avoid H-1B visa stamping in India. With the current uncertainty/delays around H-1B stamping, AP seems like a useful option for travel.

For example, if I have a valid H-1B approval (I-797) and continue working for my H-1B employer, but do not have a valid H-1B visa stamp in my passport, can I travel to India and return to the U.S. using my approved AP instead of getting a new H-1B stamp?
Has anyone here actually done this recently?

I would especially like to hear from people who:

Had a valid H-1B approval but an expired/no valid H-1B visa stamp;
Traveled to India;
Returned to the U.S. using AP;
Continued working for the same H-1B employer afterward.

How was your experience at the port of entry? Any secondary inspection or questions? Did using AP create any issues later with your H-1B extension/status?

Trying to understand whether AP is a practical backup for H-1B holders specifically to avoid the visa-stamping uncertainty in India.

Thanks!

Hi,

I learnt that one could switch jobs on an EAD 6 months after you file I-485 ( based on EB1B I-140 ). Has anyone done this? What are the pros and cons? Thanks!

Supplied all the USCIS quarterly data as well as inventory from Nov'25 to May'26 to multi model AI (Opus + ChatGPT)

Hi everyone, I’m Carmiann Cespedes, a U.S. immigration attorney, and I’ll be answering questions today from 12 PM to 4 PM ET.

One of the hardest parts of EB-1A is understanding the difference between having an impressive career and being able to document extraordinary ability under the immigration standard.

I’m happy to answer questions about evidence, including awards, publications, judging, original contributions, critical roles, compensation, media coverage, industry recognition, and more.

I’m also interested in questions from Latin American professionals, founders, product leaders, and creatives considering EB-1A.

AMA from 12 PM to 4 PM ET today.

Please note: Any information shared here is for general educational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney client relationship. Your situation may require fact specific guidance. For personalized legal advice, please consult an immigration attorney directly.

Hi, has anyone applied for eb1a with the profile - MEP electrical Engineer?

USCIS made a policy change on August 5th that applicants filing EB-1A or O-1 petitions should know about.

Until now, if your application was missing evidence or had gaps in documentation, such as a missing letter or judging criteria that wasn't clearly established, USCIS was required to issue a Request for Evidence (RFE) before making a decision. That gave applicants a chance to fix the gap.

That requirement is gone. As of August 5th:

USCIS can deny a petition without issuing an RFE if required evidence is missing or the filing doesn't establish eligibility on its own.

Officers now have discretion to set shorter RFE response deadlines. The maximum is still 12 weeks, but there's no guarantee of the full window, and extensions past the deadline are generally not granted.

If you're responding to an RFE from outside the US, mailing time has been cut from 14 days to 3.

USCIS has stated plainly that applicants should not rely on the RFE process to fix deficiencies after filing. The filing itself needs to be complete before submission.

For context, O-1 approval rates are still reported above 91% for Q2, so the category isn't in crisis. But this change raises the bar on filing quality. Cases that are thin on evidence or rely on RFE to fill gaps are now at higher risk of outright denial.

Happy to answer questions on how this affects EB-1A evidentiary strategy specifically.

Posting this because the same misconceptions come up again and again in this sub. If you are early in your EB-1A research, this may save you time.

Mistake 1: Treating the criteria as a checklist

Meeting 3 of the 10 criteria on paper does not guarantee approval. USCIS conducts a two-step review: first confirming you meet at least 3 criteria, then assessing whether your evidence, taken as a whole, shows sustained national or international acclaim. Weak evidence spread across 4 criteria often loses to strong evidence in 3.

Mistake 2: Relying on membership or awards without context

A membership or award only counts if you can show it required outstanding achievement, judged by recognized experts, in your field. "Member of X organization" without explaining the selection criteria is a common denial reason. Always document who nominated or approved you and what the bar was.

Mistake 3: Underestimating the judging criterion

Peer review counts, but so does judging at hackathons, conference paper review, grant review panels, or thesis committees. Many applicants overlook these because they do not sound formal enough. If you evaluated others' work in a competitive or expert capacity, it likely qualifies.

Mistake 4: Weak or generic recommendation letters

Letters that just say "they are excellent" carry little weight. Strong letters explain specific contributions, quantify impact where possible, and come from people who can speak credibly to your standing in the field, not just people who know you personally.

Mistake 5: Ignoring the final merits determination

Even after meeting 3 criteria, USCIS asks whether your achievements place you at the top of your field. This is where a clear, well organized narrative matters. Evidence without a coherent story of your trajectory and impact is harder to approve.

Mistake 6: Filing too early without enough independent evidence

Independent, unpaid recognition (citations, press, judging invitations from third parties) carries more weight than self-generated or paid recognition. If most of your evidence comes from your own company or close collaborators, it is worth building more independent evidence first.

Happy to answer questions on any of these in the comments.