WeGreened Approval Statistics: Week of December 1, 2025

During the week of December 1 to December 7, 2025, WeGreened received 95 approval notices from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Of the 95 approvals, 68 were for NIW (National Interest Waiver), 20 for EB1A (Alien of Extraordinary Ability), 5 for EB1B (Outstanding Professors or Researchers), and 2 for O1A (Individuals with Extraordinary Ability or Achievement). The EB-2 NIW category again represented the majority of approvals, while the EB-1A category maintained a strong presence among accomplished researchers, clinicians, and industry professionals.

EB1A and NIW Credential Analysis

EB1A petitioners demonstrated strong and concentrated scholarly productivity, with publications ranging from 6 to 46 (Q1: 10, median 12, Q3: 21.5) and citations between 122 and 13,821 (Q1: 215.5, median 589, Q3: 1,211). These figures reflect substantial academic achievement and international impact, with most EB1A approvals clustering in the low teens to low twenties for publication counts and several hundred citations, together with a few highly cited outliers in the thousands. Roughly two-thirds of EB1A petitioners held doctoral or medical degrees, and the remainder primarily held master’s degrees; about 90% of EB1A cases were in STEM or closely related technical fields.

NIW petitioners showed a broader range of academic and professional profiles. Publication counts ranged from 1 to 62 (Q1: 6, median 9, Q3: 13), and citations ranged from 17 to 4,703 (Q1: 75, median 191, Q3: 393). This distribution highlights USCIS’s flexibility in recognizing both well-established scholars and mid-career professionals whose work carries substantial merit and national importance, even when their citation counts are more modest than typical EB1A profiles. Around two-thirds of NIW petitioners held doctoral or medical degrees, with most of the remainder holding master’s-level credentials. Approximately 87% of NIW approvals were in STEM-coded areas, while a meaningful minority came from fields internally classified as non-STEM, such as accounting, statistics, population health, and gerontology.

Insights on Petitioner Backgrounds and Fields

EB1A approvals this week were concentrated in research-intensive STEM and clinical disciplines. Typical fields included environmental and energy engineering, civil and aerospace engineering, semiconductors, materials science, robotics, computer science and AI, bioinformatics, biotechnology, and subspecialty clinical research such as pulmonary and critical care medicine and transplant endocrinology. Most EB1A petitioners held university or research-institute roles (assistant professor, research faculty, staff scientist, senior engineer, postdoctoral fellow) and were able to show that their work has been taken up by the broader field through citations, adoption of methods, or leadership of key projects.

NIW approvals spanned a wider mix of disciplines and career stages. In addition to AI, computer science, and software engineering, many petitioners worked in traditional and emerging branches of engineering, biomedical and health sciences, biostatistics and data science, and quantitatively oriented non-STEM areas such as accounting and learning sciences. Profiles commonly included Ph.D. students, postdoctoral researchers, assistant professors, research scientists, data scientists, and clinicians whose projects are clearly tied to U.S. priorities in healthcare, AI and digital infrastructure, advanced manufacturing, energy transition, environmental protection, and economic resilience.

Highlighted EB1A Case: Approval after 20 days for a Materials Scientist with 122 citations

One notable EB1A approval this week involved a materials scientist specializing in advanced functional materials and oxide-based systems. The petitioner holds a Ph.D. in physics and works in a research-intensive role at a major U.S. research institution. At the time of filing, the record included 10 peer-reviewed journal articles in highly selective physics and chemistry outlets, 12 conference abstracts, and 122 citations, supported by a strong track record of competitively funded research. The case was filed with premium processing and approved in 20 days, and our firm prepared four detailed expert recommendation letters from leading scientists to contextualize the petitioner’s influence in the field.

Our legal team organized the filing under the two-part Kazarian framework and demonstrated that several EB1A criteria were clearly satisfied. We first documented extensive service as a judge of the work of others, including peer review for high-impact scientific journals and evaluation of external research proposals. We then framed the petitioner’s original contributions of major significance by explaining how work on engineered interfaces and tunable material properties has been repeatedly relied on by independent research groups to design new materials for energy, electronics, and quantum-related applications. We also highlighted a sustained pattern of authorship in top-tier journals, showing that editors and reviewers consistently treat the petitioner’s research as field-shaping rather than routine. In the final merits analysis, we synthesized publications, citations, funding record, third-party uptake, expert letters, and the petitioner’s role within a prominent U.S. research environment to show that this profile falls within the small percentage at the very top of the field.

This outcome illustrates that in materials science and related disciplines, a strong EB1A case does not depend on volume alone. When the record clearly connects high-impact research, independent adoption by other teams, trusted gatekeeping roles, and leadership on competitively funded projects, it is possible to meet both the evidentiary criteria and the final merits test, even in a highly competitive, citation-dense area.

Adjudication Trends and Policy Observations

This week’s data reaffirm that EB1A remains focused on a narrow band of profiles with clear, field-wide influence: strong publication and citation records, original contributions recognized by independent experts, and leadership roles in significant research or clinical programs. Meeting the regulatory criteria is only the starting point—how those achievements translate into sustained acclaim and impact across the field continues to be central in USCIS’s final merits analysis.

NIW approvals continue to span a broader mix of disciplines and career stages, including AI, engineering, health sciences, and quantitatively oriented non-STEM fields. Officers appear receptive to cases where the petitioner can clearly (1) define a proposed endeavor that aligns with U.S. priorities, (2) show concrete indicators of current impact, and (3) explain why flexibility from the job-offer and labor-certification requirements will make it easier to expand that impact in the United States. For many early- and mid-career professionals, this week’s outcomes illustrate that a focused narrative of national importance can be just as important as raw citation counts.

--------------------------------------------

North America Immigration Law Group (Chen Immigration Law Associates) is a U.S. immigration law firm dedicated to representing corporations, research institutions, and individuals from all 50 U.S. states regarding I-140 immigration petitions. We specialize in employment-based immigration petition and have a proven record of high success rate for the categories of: EB2-NIW (National Interest Waiver), EB1-A (Alien of Extraordinary Ability), EB1-B (Outstanding Researcher/Professor) and O-1 (Alien of Extraordinary Ability).

Our Ten Thousand I-140 Approvals Provide Unprecedented Insight into the USCIS Adjudication Trend

With nearly 64,000 EB-1A, EB-1B, EB-2 NIW and O-1 cases approved, we have first hand information on the manner in which the USCIS adjudicate I-140 cases. As the USCIS has constantly changed its adjudication standards for the EB-1A, EB-1B and EB-2 NIW categories, our firm's huge database of successful cases gives you unprecedented insight to USCIS adjudication trends. We carefully analyze the data for all of our cases and apply the results of our analyses toward giving our clients up-to-date advice and adapting our strategies such that we remain on par with the ever-shifting landscape of immigration law in the U.S. With us, you will always have access to important updates, strategies, and information so that you can make the most informed decisions about your case.

We Have Helped Tens of Thousands of Clients with Credentials and Backgrounds Similar to Yours

With our exceedingly large number of successful petitions, no matter what credentials you have, no matter your background and field of expertise, no matter your visa status or nationality, chances are we have helped hundreds or even thousands of clients just like you. Our clients are usually impressed with how well we understand their research and work. Our insight and understanding stems from the fact that we have handled many cases with elements similar to yours already, and this helps us devise the best strategies for each individual petition.

Vast Majority of Clients Came to Us Because of Referrals

For years, our firm has attracted new clients based solely on word of mouth, recommendations, and the positive collaboration experiences shared with them by their friends and family. We take pride in our reputation and work hard to ensure that we provide a green card application experience that our clients are happy to share with their friends and colleagues. That is how our cumulative total of approved cases grew from 600 in 2013 to nearly 64,000 in 2025.

Track Record of Success EB-1 and NIW Approvals

(2020.01 - 2024.12)

Category	Approval or Refund^®		Approval or Refiling^TM
Category	Approved Sum	Success Rate	Approved Sum	Success Rate
NIW	28,946	99.52%	3,030	98.31%
EB1A	4,322	91.76%	2,870	88.91%
EB1B	793	98.51%	236	90.77%
Total	34,061	98.44%	6,136	93.39%