小白兔等大俠請幫忙, NIW refer disaster

等了一年多NIW, 等來了一封莫名其妙的refer. (NSC)

1. Attestations from current and prior supervisors tend also to support a conclusion that the national interest would NOT be adversely affected if an employer were to request permanent employment certification from the Department of Labor, and to file an immigrant petition on what would then be the alien petitioner’s behalf. In addition, the petitioner indicates he does not want his employment prospects to be limited to the University of XXX which would be the case if the University were to file a labor certification in his behalf.

查遍了我的材料, 推薦信沒有一點點這個意思(to support a conclusion that the national interest would NOT be adversely affected if an employer were to request permanent employment certification from the Department of Labor, and to file an immigrant petition on what would then be the alien petitioner’s behalf.) 我自己在解釋為什麽不做labor clearance時, 表示為研究工作, 不願受雇主限製. 為什麽移民官會這樣理解, 如何應對?

我應給出什麽理由, the national interest would be adversely affected if an employer were to request permanent employment certification from the Department of Labor.

2. Please experts’ letters attesting to the impact that the alien petitioner’s work has had to cancer research.

我的研究領域是fuel cell, 燃料電池, 與癌症cancer相差十萬八千裏. 是不是移民官沒仔細讀案子, 或根本不懂, 看見了cell就當成了cancer? 還是把我的案子和別人的混了, 還是筆誤? 我該如何回答呢?

請諸位大俠分析幫忙, 感激不盡.

所有跟帖： 

• Did you see your cover litter before it's ted? -jiebai- ♂ (189 bytes) () 10/16/2006 postreply 09:52:33

• I did it. -BaoBaoBaoMa- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2006 postreply 09:53:41

• 你對NIW的標準理解是錯誤的，不願意被雇主限製不能是NIW的申請理由 -xiaobaitu- ♀ (139 bytes) () 10/16/2006 postreply 10:44:27

• 謝謝, -BaoBaoBaoMa- ♀ (0 bytes) () 10/16/2006 postreply 11:40:50

• 值得商榷!! -WorthIt- ♂ (1156 bytes) () 10/16/2006 postreply 18:28:33

• 回複：小白兔等大俠請幫忙, NIW refer disaster -fsa2000- ♀ (49 bytes) () 10/16/2006 postreply 20:23:03