Self-Sponsorship in a Shifting Landscape: Takeaways from Our June 4 Webinar

On June 4, Joorney hosted a live webinar that drew from what attorneys in our network have been telling us for months: the self-sponsorship pathways that used to be predictable are not anymore. H-1B lottery pressure, a proposed $100K filing fee, NIW cases hitting unexpected RFEs, and L-1 submissions facing new scrutiny around managerial authority — the landscape has changed, and attorneys need real strategies to work within it.

To lead that conversation, we were joined by Jessica Weiss, Esq., a partner and U.S. immigration attorney at Weiss & Moy PC. Jessica has been practicing immigration law since 1997. Her practice covers business and family immigration, with particular depth in E-1/E-2 non-immigrant visas, employment-based categories, and self-sponsorship strategies. She has represented individuals, corporations, and world-renowned athletes across O-1, P, H-1B, and religious worker categories — and she knows, firsthand, what it looks like when a case that should have been straightforward suddenly is not.

What follows is a summary of the key takeaways from the session.

The NIW Is Getting Harder — and It Helps to Be Honest About That

One of the first things Jessica addressed was the national interest waiver. The NIW has long been appealing because of its flexibility for self-sponsoring professionals. That appeal has not gone away, but the evidentiary bar has risen in ways that are catching attorneys off guard.

The biggest shift: USCIS wants neutral third-party evidence. Reference letters from former colleagues or supervisors are no longer enough. Officers want independent sources — people with no prior relationship to the applicant — to speak to national impact. That means finding experts willing to write letters about work they only know through published output, or commissioned expert opinion letters from professionals in the field.

Jessica put it plainly: “You have to go find people that don’t even know this person and say, ‘We need your letter.’” The level of neutrality now required can feel unreasonable. Some of it is. But it is where the standard currently sits.

The same applies to publications. Officers are scrutinizing not just whether a publication is credible, but how large its circulation is and who can independently verify that — a level of depth that would not have been required a few years ago.

For cases where the evidentiary record is not strong enough to withstand that scrutiny, Jessica’s advice is direct: either build the case over another year or two before filing, or find a different category. Pursuing a NIW with a weak profile, hoping the officer won’t notice, is not a strategy worth taking right now.

The H-1B Pivot: Where Clients Are Going Instead

The proposed $100K H-1B filing fee has created real disruption for clients who counted on employer sponsorship as their path. Companies large enough to absorb that cost are doing so. For everyone else, the math doesn’t work — and attorneys are helping clients find alternatives.

The E-2 has become the most common destination. For clients from treaty countries whose employers have a qualifying ownership relationship, the E-2 offers a workable path without the lottery and without the filing fee. Jessica noted that she has recently worked with a Taiwanese company pivoting from H-1B to E-2 for employees who would otherwise have been stuck.

The J-1 has also come up more frequently, particularly the specialist category, which Jessica said she is now actively using for clients who need a bridge while they wait for another lottery cycle. A J-1 specialist visa can provide up to 12 months of authorized status, and the two-year home residency requirement that historically made attorneys nervous is, in her experience, much less common than it used to be. For someone who missed the H-1B lottery and whose OPT is running out, a J-1 as a temporary bridge — before switching to an L-1A or trying again the following year — is worth a serious look.

One important nuance Jessica flagged: for those already inside the United States, a change of status to H-1B does not trigger the $100K fee. The fee applies when the petition is filed from outside the country. That distinction matters when advising clients about sequencing.

The E-2: Why It Is More Relevant Right Now Than It Has Been in Years

Jessica is direct about her enthusiasm for the E-2. “It brings money to this country, it creates jobs for legal workers. It’s a win-win.” That combination — investor benefit, job creation, clear structure — makes it genuinely attractive in the current environment.

On the practical side, what does a strong E-2 setup look like? Jessica looks for:

Investment amount. The threshold is not $1 million. For most businesses, the investment range she works with is $100,000 to $150,000. That amount is accessible through savings, home equity, or even a family gift. Students she has worked with have received $200,000 gifts from family members to purchase existing businesses.

Two full-time employees. The E-2 is not designed for solo operations. Her current guidance: have at least one employee on board when filing, and have a second within the first six months. Minimum wage qualifies. The bar on compensation is not high; what matters is that the positions exist.

An operating business. Her strong preference is for clients to open the doors before filing. “Get the doors open. Don’t just put it all on paper and say, ‘Trust us, we’re gonna open.’” Even showing one or two months of payroll in place changes how the case reads.

Clean source of funds. The funds need to be from a documented, tax-compliant source. This catches people off guard more often than it should.

A transferable lease. If the client is purchasing an existing business, confirming that the landlord will transfer the lease to the new owner — at the current rate — is a step that needs to happen before the deal closes, not after.

On the question of business type: Jessica has seen salons, coffee shops, dog grooming businesses, home financing operations, and apartment complexes. The E-2 does not require industry-specific experience. What the officer needs to see is that the investor has the capacity to manage the business. When experience is thin, a letter from someone in the same industry attesting to the applicant’s transferable skills can address that gap.

One question that came up from an attendee: how many employees should the business plan to create over five years to avoid appearing marginal? Jessica’s answer was practical rather than formulaic. Two full-time employees within the first six months, and then growth that matches what the business realistically needs. A coffee shop does not need ten employees in five years. An applicant with two locations might get there naturally. What matters is that the projections in the business plan are credible, not that they reach any particular number.

E-2 as a Stepping Stone: The Green Card Conversation

Many clients approach the E-2 as a temporary measure and are surprised to learn it can fit into a longer-term immigration strategy. Jessica starts that conversation early — ideally at the point of filing.

The most common path she has seen for E-2 holders is EB-3. A lot of her E-2 clients do not have a graduate degree and cannot self-petition for EB-2. They need a sponsor. That sponsor does not have to be a current employer; it can be a colleague or contact in the industry willing to make a legitimate job offer. The applicant does not need to start working for the sponsor immediately — only when the green card is in hand. “He has to work for a reasonable time that he tried to make his best efforts to make the job work.”

For clients who are building toward something larger — and who have the capital — the E-2 company itself can sometimes be structured to eventually support an EB-5 petition. That requires thinking about the setup from the beginning, not at the renewal stage.

The point is that E-2 does not have to be a dead end. Clients who come to Jessica saying they have been on E-2 for twenty years and do not know how to move forward have options. It requires analysis, and it requires a sponsor if EB-3 is the route, but there are paths.

The L-1A and EB-1C: Building a Case That Holds Up

The L-1A is facing increased scrutiny around one specific question: does the beneficiary actually supervise and manage other people, or are they primarily doing operational work?

USCIS officers are now asking for documentary evidence of executive or managerial activity — contracts signed, decisions made, communications that show supervisory authority. The name and title of the beneficiary should appear on company documents. The more you can demonstrate, in actual records, that this person is doing what the job description says, the better the case holds.

Jessica’s structural preference: a tiered organization with a clear chain of command, a minimum of four to five staff reporting below the manager or executive level, and workers who are legally authorized to work in the United States. That last point requires attention in the current environment. TPS holders, workers on open work permits, and 1099 contractors can create complications. The I-9 documentation needs to be in order.

She also addressed the path from L-1A to EB-1C. Her approach is to pursue the EB-1C I-140 close in time to the L-1 extension, while the documentation from the extension process is still fresh. What officers want to see: positive net income (even a small positive is meaningful), growing gross sales, an org chart demonstrating the reporting structure, and evidence that the foreign entity is still operating and financially healthy. If the U.S. entity is still in early stages and showing a loss, the argument that the foreign parent is supporting the U.S. operation — and that growth is on the horizon — can be made, but it requires documentation.

The EB-1A: When to File, When to Wait

Jessica is genuinely cautious about filing EB-1A cases that are not clearly strong, and the current adjudication environment has made her more so. Officers are applying final merits analysis even to cases that meet three evidentiary criteria, following Mukerji v. Miller (January 2026). Meeting the criteria is no longer a guarantee.

Her practical guidance: if an applicant is not clearly at the top of their field, waiting and building their profile is often the better choice. More publications, more press coverage, more evidence of real impact on the field — those things can be added. Filing a borderline case and receiving a ten-page RFE is not just frustrating; it puts the applicant in a position where they may not have anything additional to offer.

For clients who do want to work toward an EB-1A, she now does consultations specifically focused on profile building: what criteria they currently meet, where the gaps are, and what they can realistically do over the next one to two years to strengthen the case.

An example she shared: a client who was genuinely top of his industry received an I-140 denial after the first filing. Two criteria granted, not three. He filed again. Got different criteria. In the RFE response, Jessica argued that between the two filings, USCIS had now effectively granted all three criteria. They agreed. The case was approved. The point is not that there is always a way through — sometimes there is not — but that creative, careful thinking about how to respond can make a difference.

The J-1 as a Bridge: Practical Steps for Attorneys

Jessica is candid that she came to the J-1 relatively recently, after attending an AILA event where a colleague presented on it and realizing there was potential she had been overlooking.

The J-1 has categories that are broader than most attorneys think. The specialist category, in particular, allows someone to come to the United States to train other workers in their area of expertise. Eligibility is flexible: ten years of work experience qualifies, as does a master’s degree plus one year of experience, or a bachelor’s degree plus three years. No degree at all, but ten years in the field? Also qualifies.

Duration is up to 12 months for the specialist category, with repeat participation allowed. For someone who did not make the H-1B lottery and is running out of options, a J-1 specialist visa buys time while they try again the following year — and if they can file the next H-1B petition from inside the United States, the $100K fee issue goes away.

The process: work with a J-1 sponsor organization (Jessica mentioned Cultural Vistas as one she has used for specialists) to submit the application. The employer and applicant gather documentation, the sponsor issues the DS-2019 form, and the applicant then applies for a visa at the consulate. With expediting, the DS-2019 can be issued in approximately two weeks. Total timeline from start to visa in hand, depending on the consulate, is roughly two to three months.

Two caveats: not every J-1 sponsor handles every category, so confirming that upfront matters. And some sponsor organizations have rules that restrict change of status from a J-1 to another visa type — that is worth clarifying before filing, since it affects how the J-1 fits into a longer plan.

Managing Clients Through Unpredictability

The session closed on what may be the most practically useful ground for many attorneys: how to hold client confidence together when the process keeps shifting.

Jessica’s answer: “Stay calm.” Not as a platitude, but as a professional posture. Clients are watching how their attorney responds to setbacks. An attorney who receives a difficult RFE and communicates clearly, honestly, and with a plan is more reassuring than one who either panics or glosses over the problem.

She also talked about documentation habits. In the current environment, she puts risk disclosures in writing. She lays out the pros, the cons, the specific risks for a given case, and asks the client to make an informed decision. That protects both parties, but it also tends to calibrate expectations before the outcome arrives.

And she made a point about approval calls that stuck: when a case is approved, she picks up the phone. She congratulates the client, thanks them for the opportunity to work on their case, and walks them through what they need to do to maintain their status. “A lot of us forget that.” The goal is not just to get the visa; it is to be the attorney the client calls the next time something comes up — and the time after that.

A Note on Business Plans from Gerald Padilla

Throughout the session, Joorney VP of Sales Gerald Padilla noted what the team has been seeing across its own case volume: an uptick in E-2 business plans, a decrease in NIW filings, and more requests for L-1 and EB-1C documentation support as those cases face heavier scrutiny.

On the business plan side, the cases that hold up best are the ones built on real operational detail. For L-1A cases, time allocation breakdowns for the beneficiary — specifying how much of their working day is spent on executive or managerial tasks, versus operational work — have become important. For E-2 cases, financial projections tied to realistic job creation timelines matter more than ever.

The current environment asks more of every document in the file. That is worth keeping in mind when starting a case, not just when responding to an RFE.

Joorney supports immigration attorneys with immigration business plans across E-2, EB-2 NIW, L-1, EB-1A, EB-1C, O-1, H-1B, and other visa categories, as well as case preparation services and RFE response support. To learn more about how we can support your cases, visit joorney.com or reach out to our team.