WeGreened Approval Statistics: Week of February 2, 2026
During the week of February 2 to February 8, 2026, WeGreened received 106 approval notices from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Of the 106 approvals, 76 were for NIW (National Interest Waiver), 24 for EB1A (Alien of Extraordinary Ability), 4 for EB1B (Outstanding Professors or Researchers), and 2 for O1A (Individuals with Extraordinary Ability or Achievement).
NIW again represented the majority of approvals, while EB1A remained strong among petitioners whose records could be presented as sustained, field-recognized excellence under a totality-of-the-evidence review.
EB1A and NIW Credential Analysis
EB1A petitioners this week showed concentrated impact metrics. Publications ranged from 8 to 141 (Q1: 16, median: 21.5, Q3: 35), and citations ranged from 187 to 6,837 (Q1: 545, median: 635.5, Q3: 1,412.5). Even with variation at the high end, EB1A approvals continued to cluster around profiles that can be framed as durable influence and recognition under final merits review.NIW petitioners reflected a broader spectrum of credential profiles. Publications ranged from 2 to 61 (Q1: 6, median: 9, Q3: 17), and citations ranged from 18 to 2,978 (Q1: 62.75, median: 123, Q3: 277.25). Compared with EB1A, NIW again showed a wider spread across both publications and citations, reinforcing that approvals can include both earlier-stage records and more established profiles when the petition clearly frames national importance, credible forward momentum, and future U.S. benefit.
Insights on Petitioner Backgrounds and Fields
EB1A approvals this week remained concentrated in biomedical and health-related work, alongside engineering, physical sciences, and computer/data-facing specialties. Employment backgrounds reflected a mix of industry-facing leaders and research-intensive roles, underscoring that EB1A is not confined to a single work setting when the evidence supports external recognition and sustained excellence.NIW approvals spanned biomedical and health sciences, AI and data-driven work, and multiple engineering tracks. Many NIW petitioners were on research-intensive pathways such as research roles and training-track positions, while a meaningful subset came from industry. Across these profiles, the strongest NIW outcomes tended to be those where the endeavor was defined with precision, the record showed concrete progress, and the petition explained how a waiver would expand U.S. benefit through flexibility and scale.
Highlighted NIW Case: NIW Approved for an Industry Pharmaceutical Science Professional with 18 Citations
One notable NIW approval this week involved a pharmaceutical science professional working in an industry role, with a proposed endeavor focused on advancing research and development approaches that support safer and more effective therapeutic development, including data-driven methods used in modern pharmacology and drug evaluation workflows. At the time of filing, the record showed compact but credible momentum, including 3 peer-reviewed publications and 18 citations, the lowest citation total among NIW approvals in this week’s dataset. The case was filed on November 7, 2025, later upgraded to premium processing, and approved on February 2, 2026.From a strategy perspective, we built a Dhanasar narrative that was both technically grounded and officer-friendly. We framed national importance in practical terms by tying the proposed work to well-recognized U.S. priorities in biomedical innovation and the need for reliable, scalable methods that strengthen how therapeutic research translates into real-world health benefit. We also contextualized impact in a way that does not rely on raw citation totals alone, using field-appropriate benchmarks and objective indicators to help the officer evaluate significance fairly. To support the “well-positioned” prong, we emphasized a coherent progression of work and clearly defined next-step projects, showing credible momentum and a realistic path to continued contributions. We strengthened third-party validation through four testimonial letters that reinforced the technical significance, real-world relevance, and credibility of the petitioner’s contributions in an applied setting. Finally, we explained why a waiver would expand U.S. benefit by enabling flexibility and broader collaboration, rather than limiting progress to a single employer pathway.
This outcome reflects a recurring NIW lesson: approvals are driven less by any single metric and more by how clearly the endeavor is defined, how cleanly the evidence is organized, and how effectively the petition translates technical value into a persuasive national-benefit narrative.
Adjudication Trends and Policy Observations
This week’s data reinforce a useful NIW signal: approvals reached the lowest end of the citation range in the dataset, including an industry profile at 18 citations, while still spanning into higher-citation territory. That spread supports the practical reality of NIW adjudication, where the most persuasive cases are those that define the endeavor precisely, show credible forward progress with organized evidence, and clearly articulate how a waiver expands U.S. benefit.Procedurally, premium processing continued to appear frequently, and in NIW it often showed up as an upgrade after filing rather than an upfront request. At the same time, a meaningful subset of NIW approvals still came through without premium processing. Across the batch, the consistent throughline remained unchanged: strong outcomes tracked best to petitions that were tightly structured under Dhanasar and supported by clear third-party validation, rather than by any single metric or procedural choice.