I recently had my E3 renewal interview, after having worked in the US for 4 years for the same employer, with the same position. The consulate officer came right out and told me that my job code was SVP 6 and, in order to be a "specialty occupation" (and thus qualify for E3) the position needs to be SVP 7. I've spoken to my lawyer, and she's shown me a lot of resources that seem to say the definition of specialty occupation is more disgressionary, and not that black and white. Also, my job code is 6, and considered to require a Bachelor's degree by all resources. According to the handbook for determing what is and isn't a specialty occupation, it looks very much like it should be.
Also, to get it out there: was nervous in the interview, and i think it showed. I understand that the officer was doing his job, and has to handle tough decisions like this all day.
My lawyer has suggested, among other options, going back to interview again with an expert letter that supports my position as a specialty occupation, as well as the page from the handbook. She has told me that it's extremely risky to just go back uninvited and basically imply "you were wrong". I really do believe, however, that i didn't present my case as effectively as i should have. And i've been consider going back and being as polite and respectful as possible, and asking if they could reconsider based on the new information i give them.
My question is: has anyone heard of someone doing something like this before? Can anyone offer any insights? I realise that many people don't get second chances, and appreciate that i had one to begin with. This is important to me, so i have to try my best.
E3 interview went badly; considering trying again. Advice?
in Work Visas
Posted
I recently had my E3 renewal interview, after having worked in the US for 4 years for the same employer, with the same position. The consulate officer came right out and told me that my job code was SVP 6 and, in order to be a "specialty occupation" (and thus qualify for E3) the position needs to be SVP 7. I've spoken to my lawyer, and she's shown me a lot of resources that seem to say the definition of specialty occupation is more disgressionary, and not that black and white. Also, my job code is 6, and considered to require a Bachelor's degree by all resources. According to the handbook for determing what is and isn't a specialty occupation, it looks very much like it should be.
Also, to get it out there: was nervous in the interview, and i think it showed. I understand that the officer was doing his job, and has to handle tough decisions like this all day.
My lawyer has suggested, among other options, going back to interview again with an expert letter that supports my position as a specialty occupation, as well as the page from the handbook. She has told me that it's extremely risky to just go back uninvited and basically imply "you were wrong". I really do believe, however, that i didn't present my case as effectively as i should have. And i've been consider going back and being as polite and respectful as possible, and asking if they could reconsider based on the new information i give them.
My question is: has anyone heard of someone doing something like this before? Can anyone offer any insights? I realise that many people don't get second chances, and appreciate that i had one to begin with. This is important to me, so i have to try my best.
Thank you so much for your time.