u/HistoricalDance6238

I know I made a mistake. I had some important documents to send via UPS. Arriving at the store, I asked for their suggestions as the documents were thick. The UPS store person suggested me to get a UPS box. Later she generated a label and I put the documents inside the box. I asked her if anything else need to be done. She said NO and returned me the receipt with tracking number. I left the box unsealed thinking they would probably do it.

Now I got to understand that there is no guarantee they would do it because it is not their job, rather it is my responsibility. It happened yesterday before 7 pm right before the shop was closed. Today is Independence day, the shop is closed. The shop will open tomorrow at 12 pm. The current tracking status shows "Labels created".

What should I do? Should I go back to the shop to ensure sealing the package?

EDIT: I went to the UPS store today (the next day). They told me that as I bought the UPS box from the store, it is their responsibility to tape the box. I do not need to worry about this.

Hello, I am doing DIY I-485 for both me and my spouse. My package is almost ready, but I am a bit confused on where I should put the cover letters. The cover letters include the formal letter to USCIS with index of forms and exhibits. Each cover letter is followed by G-1650, G-1145, I-485 and supporting documents. The photographs are attached on top of the cover letter with paper clips.

But I found that some references where it says G-1650 followed by G-1145 should be at the top, the cover letter should be after these two forms. On official USCIS website, there is no mention of cover letter. Because I mention these two forms in the index list of the cover letter, I thought they should come after the cover letter.

Any suggestions on whether I should put the cover letter on the top before any forms or I should put G-1650 and G-1145, then the cover letter?

Hi all, I plan to do DIY for I-485. My EB2-NIW I-140 was approved this month. Currently I have been preparing evidence for I-485.

I found that employment verification letter is recommended to be included in I-485 package at some places. In my case, I am an ongoing PhD student at a US university. At the time of admission, I got an offer letter guaranteeing one year full fund along with possiblity of funding in future years given progress in research. Typically once you find a research advisor, he ensures your funding every semester since then. At the beginning of every semester, we get a contract for the semester as GRA from our advisors. As I am currently in my 5th year, I have overall 14 such contracts.

My questions are:

1. Is it absolutely necessary to provide employment verification letters?
2. What should we present as a proof for employment verification in this case? Should I include all contracts + initial offer letter? Or should it be a subset of them?
3. Alternatively, are pay stubs enough to conclude my employment verification?

I got my I-140 approved yesterday and am from one of the 75 countries who are currently under immigration visa pause. I got a lot of useful suggestions from this thread, so decided to share my experiences thinking it might be helpful for others.

PD: April 2025

PP received: 10/22/2025

RFE issued: 12/22/2025

RFE response received: 03/13/2026

Approved: 05/04/2026.

Attorney: EP

LOR: 0 (initial filing), 2 (RFE response)

PhD student (Computer Engineering) in US with an MS in US (Electrical engineering)

Publications: 6.

PE related: co-authored 1 journal and 1 conference; first-authored 1 survey and 1 magazine.

Unrelated to PE: first-authored 1 journal and 1 workshop conference.

Citations: 94 (initial filing), 274 (RFE response)

Peer review experience: 5+

PE: To continue developing artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) strategies to optimize spectrum sharing and network resource management in integrated terrestrial and non-terrestrial networks (NTNs).

Nebraska service center.

Overall, I think it was a disaster in the RFE partly due to the fact that I relied heavily on my lawyer to do the job for me. My RFE was for all three prongs.

Prong 1: The link between my proposed endeavor and national importance was not clear from any aspects.

Prong 2: None of the submitted evidence cite my names to demonstrate the extent of my contributions. No letter of recommendations.

Prong 3: It is kind of generic, mostly echoing what was stated in prong 1.

During the RFE stage, I reviewed my original filing and realized the national importance evidence and my personal statement were not convincing. My statement mainly described technical work without clearly explaining why it matters to the United States. To fix this, I rebuilt the narrative of my proposed endeavor using explicit support from U.S. government sources. I collected 8–10 excerpts from .gov sites (e.g., FCC, NTIA, DOE) and used them up front to ground the national-importance argument. I then organized the endeavor into three clear thrusts with measurable actions and impacts and closed by showing how my prior work positions me to execute the plan.

I also went through the attorney’s legal brief point-by-point and provided targeted suggestions. They were responsive and incorporated most changes. My takeaway is: read your brief carefully and guide the story, your lawyer cannot do that without your direction. While the tone felt harsh at times, I accepted it as standard legal style for RFEs.

For recommendation letters, I initially thought “more is better,” but EP advised that more than two drafted letters add limited value and is harder to manage. Given time constraints, I focused on two strong independent letters to make the best use of available resources. Thankfully, that approach worked well in the end.

For prong 3, we did not do anything special. EP said if the officer is convinced with prong 1 and 2, prong 3 is generally not an issue.

Also, I did not encounter any issue or additional charge to file PP through my lawyer like some folks in this thread.

Overall, my experience with EP was mostly good. At some places, I thought they could have provided a bit more clarity on what is expected, but I think it was my responsibility to find out as well. I am grateful that things ended positively at I-140 phase for me.