EB-2 NIW “Approve or Refund” Explained: What Ellis Porter and Chen Immigration Contracts Actually Say

For many high skilled immigrants pursuing permanent residence through the EB-2 National Interest Waiver, choosing an immigration law firm is one of the most consequential decisions in the process. Legal fees often range from several thousand to well over ten thousand dollars, and USCIS processing times can span years.

To reduce risk, many law firms advertise approval or refund guarantees. On the surface, these guarantees sound reassuring. In practice, however, the meaning of refund depends entirely on the fine print of the attorney client agreement.

In this article, I compare two commonly discussed EB-2 NIW contracts, Ellis Porter and Chen Immigration Law Associates, also known as North America Immigration Law Group and WeGreened, focusing specifically on their refund provisions. The goal is not to recommend one firm over another, but to help applicants understand how contract language can materially affect their rights.

Why EB-2 NIW Refund Clauses Matter More Than Marketing

An EB-2 NIW petition can take anywhere from months to several years to resolve. During that time, applicants may face visa expiration, employment disruptions, and changing immigration policies.

A refund guarantee is intended to protect clients from bearing the full financial cost if USCIS denies the petition. However, not all refund guarantees operate the same way. Some are triggered immediately upon denial, while others are delayed or subject to multiple conditions that may not be obvious before signing.

Ellis Porter EB-2 NIW Refund Policy Explained

Under Ellis Porter’s current EB-2 NIW retainer agreement, the refund mechanism operates under a multi step structure.

• Refund Only After Two Denials

The contract provides that:

If the first I-140 petition is denied, Ellis Porter will refile the case at no additional attorney fee.

Only if the second I-140 petition is also denied does the client become eligible to choose between another refile or a refund of attorney fees.

This means there is no refund option after the first denial. Given current USCIS processing timelines, reaching a second denial may take two to three years or longer.

• Refund Clause Voided by Policy Changes

The agreement explicitly states that the refund and refile provision is offered based on the governing legal authority in effect on the date the contract is signed.

If a material change occurs before adjudication, such as:

• a USCIS policy memorandum,
• a binding precedent decision,
• an executive order, or
• a regulatory change,

then the refund provision may be voided entirely.

The contract does not require that the policy change be directly related to EB-2 NIW eligibility or adverse to the specific case.

• Full Cooperation and Strategy Disputes

The contract also requires the client’s full cooperation with the attorney’s strategy. In online discussions, particularly regarding premium processing, some applicants report being told that declining certain strategic recommendations could be considered a lack of cooperation, potentially affecting refund eligibility.

Regardless of how enforceable such interpretations may be, this clause introduces uncertainty and discretion into the refund process.

Chen Immigration and WeGreened EB-2 NIW Refund Policy Explained

Chen Immigration Law Associates, operating as North America Immigration Law Group and WeGreened, takes a notably different approach to refund guarantees.

• Refund After First Denial

If USCIS denies the I-140 petition:

The client may request a 100 percent refund of attorney fees, which is processed within seven business days, or

The client may choose to appeal the denial or refile the case instead. There is no requirement to proceed with a second filing before becoming eligible for a refund.

• No Policy Change Void Clause

Chen Immigration’s refund provision does not state that the guarantee is voided by intervening USCIS policy changes. The refund is tied directly to the case outcome rather than to external regulatory developments.

• Strategy Independence

Refund eligibility is not conditioned on following particular litigation or processing strategies, including whether to request premium processing. While clients must cooperate by providing accurate documents and responding to USCIS requests, refund rights are not linked to discretionary strategic decisions.

Side by Side Comparison of EB-2 NIW Refund Terms

(1) Refund Trigger

• Ellis Porter: After two denials
• Chen Immigration / WeGreened: After first denial

(2) Mandatory Refile

• Ellis Porter: Yes
• Chen Immigration / WeGreened: No

(3) Policy Change Impact

• Ellis Porter: May void refund
• Chen Immigration / WeGreened: No such clause

(4) Strategy Compliance Tied to Refund

• Ellis Porter: Possible
• Chen Immigration / WeGreened: No

(5) Refund Timing

• Ellis Porter: Undefined; may take years
• Chen Immigration / WeGreened: Seven business days

The Bigger Lesson for EB-2 NIW Applicants

Neither approach is inherently right or wrong. Some applicants may be comfortable with refiling strategies and extended timelines. Others may prioritize predictability and the ability to recover fees quickly if a case is denied.

What matters most is understanding that approval or refund is not a standardized promise. It is a contractual mechanism whose value depends on:

• when the refund is triggered,
• what conditions can void it, and
• who has discretion in interpreting compliance.

Before signing any EB-2 NIW retainer agreement, applicants should:

• Read the refund section line by line,
• Ask when a refund becomes available,
• Clarify how policy changes are treated, and
• Understand whether strategic disagreements could affect refund eligibility.

In immigration law, time is often as valuable as money. A refund that is available only after several years may offer far less protection than it appears at first glance.

Disclaimer: This article is based on publicly shared contract language and personal review of EB-2 NIW retainer agreements. It is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Applicants should consult qualified counsel and review contracts carefully before signing.