Most candidates are competing in a lottery they were never required to enter
On 1 October the H-1B workers selected in this year's lottery started work, and everyone who was not selected began a twelve-month wait for the next registration window. 211,600 people registered for FY2027, 38.5 percent fewer than the year before, and there was no second round. A large share of them were never obliged to be in that queue.
Institutions of higher education, nonprofits affiliated with them, and nonprofit or governmental research organisations are exempt from the numerical cap. A petition filed by an exempt employer is not entered in the lottery, is not counted against the cap, and can be filed on any day of the year, up to six months before the start date. It can request a change of status directly from F-1, which is the point that matters most this month, as section 11 explains. No March registration window. No April result. No October start.
Figures are government filing fees only and vary with employer size and premium processing. Attorney or preparer costs are separate.
The most common reason a sponsorship discussion dies is a principal investigator or department administrator assuming it costs tens of thousands of dollars and takes a year. For a cap-exempt nonprofit it usually costs under a thousand in government fees and can be filed the week an offer is signed. Send them this section.
Deadline season: 4,921 positions close by 31 December, and the four busiest dates are already in sight
October is when the academic year's hiring is decided. More than half of this list, 3,851 postings, went up in the last thirty days, and the employer-stated deadlines pile into four dates: 1 November (172 postings), 15 November (160), 15 October (136) and 1 December (117). Faculty searches run the calendar; postdoc and research-staff postings are spread across it and mostly recruit until filled.
Employer-stated deadlines only. Listing-close dates are excluded here because they describe the advertisement, not the search; Verdict 02 explains the difference.
The twelve-week plan this calendar implies
- Now to 31 October. The 15 October and 31 October deadlines are faculty-heavy. If you are applying to a tenure-track line that closes this month, the sponsorship conversation belongs after the interview invitation, not in the cover letter.
- 1 to 15 November. The peak. 332 stated deadlines fall on those two dates alone. Economics, mathematics and physics run on this calendar, which is why those three fields have the highest shares of stated deadlines in the edition.
- December. 1 December and 15 December carry the last large waves of faculty searches; the biological sciences, neuroscience and pharmacy fields peak here. Postdoc postings keep arriving through the month.
- The parallel track. Comments on the OPT fee proposal close on 9 November and on the grace-period proposal on 10 November. Section 11 explains why both reach a researcher at a cap-exempt employer.
A closing date on a job board is not a deadline. We label the two differently, and the difference is most of the calendar
7,583 postings carry 6,076 dates. Only 2,241 of those are deadlines the employer wrote: a date by which applications are due. Another 379 are stated review or priority dates. The remaining 3,456 are the day the job board will take the advertisement down, typically 30, 60 or 90 days after posting, and they cluster in artificial spikes, 1,262 of them in a single week in December for no reason other than that the postings went up sixty days earlier.
The stated deadlines tell the real story of the season. 1,565 of them fall between today and 31 December, and the four busiest dates in the entire edition are 1 November (172 postings), 15 November (160), 15 October (136) and 1 December (117). If you are reading this on publication day, 507 positions in the list close within seven days.
What we counted, and how 45,355 postings became 7,583
The report has two independent halves and keeping them apart is the whole design. The position sweep says who is hiring right now. The filing data says who has actually sponsored. Neither substitutes for the other.
The sweep read twenty-one sources: the Chronicle of Higher Education and Inside Higher Ed job boards, Nature Careers, Science Careers and THE unijobs, AcademicJobsOnline and MathJobs, the AEA's JOE listings and the accounting, finance, management, INFORMS and AACSB career centers, the AGU, Physics Today and American Statistical Association boards, USAJOBS and the NIH institutes, all nine open University of California recruitment sites, fourteen national laboratories, and the Workday careers sites of fifty universities, medical centers and research institutes. Every posting that passed the geography, status, role and employer rules was opened and read in full.
The clean step records a reason for every one of the 37,772 rows it removed; the full ladder is in section 13.
Two things that are easy to get wrong
A date is not always a deadline. Job boards attach an expiry to every advertisement. We label those as listing closes and keep them separate from the 2,241 deadlines an employer actually wrote. Silence is not a refusal. Ninety percent of postings say nothing about sponsorship, and a posting that requires existing work authorization is labelled as exactly that, not as a no.
We read 45,355 postings from 21 sources and kept 7,583. This time breadth did not cost depth
September's edition traded per-posting detail for breadth: it read listing pages and left the sponsorship and deadline columns mostly empty. This month we did both. Every posting that passed the geography, status, role and employer rules was re-opened and its full text read, 10,017 pages in all, so the deadline, salary and sponsorship columns are filled wherever the employer said anything.
The cost shows in a different place: 37,772 rows were dropped, and we publish every reason. 7,338 were part-time, adjunct or pool postings; 5,205 were clinical practice; 4,578 were senior administration; 4,149 were clinical or non-STEM faculty; 1,522 were outside the United States; 474 required US citizenship or a security clearance; 586 had a stated deadline that had already passed.
Where the jobs are
Open research and faculty positions at cap-exempt US employers on 10 October 2026, sorted into thirteen fields. The biological sciences, business and engineering account for more than half of the list. Faculty lines are 59 percent of the rows, which is the autumn calendar showing; the postdoc share rises every month from here as the searches close.
| Field | Positions | Close by 31 Dec | Share | Distribution |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biological SciencesMolecular Biology · Genetics & Genomics · Cell Biology · Biochemistry · Microbiology & Immunology · Neuroscience · Structural & Computational Biology | 1,950 | 1,200 | 25.7% | |
| Economics, Finance & BusinessEconomics · Finance · Accounting · Marketing · Management · Operations | 1,096 | 925 | 14.5% | |
| EngineeringMechanical · Electrical · Civil · Chemical · Biomedical · Aerospace · Industrial & Systems | 981 | 590 | 12.9% | |
| Computer Science & Artificial IntelligenceMachine Learning · Artificial Intelligence · Systems · Theory · Security · Human-Computer Interaction · Data Science | 637 | 359 | 8.4% | |
| Neuroscience & PsychologySystems Neuroscience · Cognitive Science · Computational Neuroscience · Clinical Psychology · Behavioural Science | 593 | 375 | 7.8% | |
| Mathematics & StatisticsPure Mathematics · Applied Mathematics · Statistics · Biostatistics · Operations Research | 542 | 376 | 7.1% | |
| Physics & AstronomyCondensed Matter · High Energy · Astrophysics · Quantum · Optics · Biophysics | 537 | 321 | 7.1% | |
| Earth, Environmental & Climate ScienceGeology · Oceanography · Atmospheric Science · Climate · Ecology · Hydrology | 400 | 259 | 5.3% | |
| Chemistry & Chemical BiologyOrganic · Inorganic · Physical · Analytical · Chemical Biology · Computational Chemistry | 288 | 187 | 3.8% | |
| Public Health & EpidemiologyEpidemiology · Biostatistics · Global Health · Health Policy · Environmental Health · Health Services | 194 | 116 | 2.6% | |
| Agriculture, Plant & Food SciencePlant Science · Agronomy · Soil Science · Food Science · Animal Science · Entomology | 132 | 98 | 1.7% | |
| Materials Science & NanotechnologyNanomaterials · Polymers · Metallurgy · Semiconductors · Energy Materials · Characterization | 124 | 40 | 1.6% | |
| Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical SciencesPharmacology · Medicinal Chemistry · Pharmaceutics · Drug Delivery · Pharmacokinetics · Clinical Pharmacy | 109 | 75 | 1.4% | |
| Total | 7,583 | 4,921 | 100% |
Every one of these positions is listed individually in section 05, with a direct application link. The per-field reports and position sheets are in section 06.
| Institution | Positions | Relative volume |
|---|---|---|
| University of Pennsylvania | 271 | |
| Los Alamos National Laboratory | 173 | |
| Pennsylvania State University | 169 | |
| University of California, Irvine | 154 | |
| Johns Hopkins University | 149 | |
| University of Texas at Austin | 133 | |
| University of Virginia | 116 | |
| Cornell University | 107 | |
| Indiana University | 107 | |
| University of Minnesota | 101 | |
| University of California, Davis | 97 | |
| University of Houston | 89 |
The University of Pennsylvania posts more openly than any employer in the country, 271 positions across the thirteen fields, 163 of them in the biological sciences. Los Alamos National Laboratory is the second largest employer in the edition and the largest postdoc employer in it. Nineteen percent of the rows sit at the twenty-four elite institutions, and seven percent at national laboratories, which pay a median of $115,925 where they state a figure.
Los Alamos 84 · Penn State 78 · Penn 72 · Johns Hopkins 63 · Minnesota 59
UC Irvine (57), Argonne (49), Washington University in St. Louis (45), the National Institutes of Health (40) and St. Jude (34) complete the ten. Four of the ten are not universities.
Penn 107 · Cornell 81 · Tennessee Knoxville 74 · Indiana 70 · Penn State 69
Houston (61), Utah (58), Colorado (53), UT Austin (52) and Stanford (51) follow. Faculty hiring is far more evenly spread than postdoc hiring: the top ten hold only 15 percent of the lines.
California 1,061 · Pennsylvania 636 · Texas 567 · New York 441 · Massachusetts 361
Virginia, Illinois, North Carolina, Florida and Georgia each carry between 270 and 290. New Mexico, with 100 engineering rows alone, is the national laboratories.
| Employer type | Positions | Share |
|---|---|---|
| UniversityUniversities and colleges outside the elite list | 5,323 | 70.2% |
| EliteTwenty-four elite universities and their medical centers | 1,407 | 18.6% |
| National LaboratoryDepartment of Energy and other national laboratories | 505 | 6.7% |
| Institute & HospitalIndependent research institutes and hospitals | 293 | 3.9% |
| Federal AgencyNIH institutes and other federal research employers | 55 | 0.7% |
Browse every position
Every position from all thirteen position sheets, in one place. Pick a field, filter by role, employer type, state, deadline window or sponsorship language, search by institution or keyword, then apply directly. Nothing here routes through us.
| Institution | Position | Role | Location | Deadline | Salary | Sponsorship | Apply |
|---|
See every position, free
Leave a first name and an email address and the rest of this page unlocks: all 7,583 postings with their deadlines, sponsorship language and direct application links, the thirteen field reports and position sheets, and every section below. We send the next edition when it publishes, and nothing else.
A first name and a working email address unlock the list.
No spam, no resale, and one click unsubscribes. StraightGreenCard is an immigration services company, not a law firm.
A deadline labelled listing closes is the day the advertisement comes down, not necessarily the day applications stop; a stated deadline is the employer's own. A sponsorship cell that reads Not stated means the posting said nothing about visas, which is the case for nine in ten. Silence is not an implicit yes. And a cell that reads Requires existing work authorization is a question for the international scholars office, not a closed door: ask after genuine interest is established rather than in the application.
The thirteen editions
Each field has its own twenty-page report and a sheet listing every open position we kept, with its deadline and deadline type, stated salary, sponsorship language, source and a direct application link on each row. Both are published with this edition, so what you open is always the edition you are reading.
Biological Sciences
Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence
Engineering
Chemistry & Chemical Biology
Physics & Astronomy
Mathematics & Statistics
Materials Science & Nanotechnology
Earth, Environmental & Climate Science
Public Health & Epidemiology
Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences
Agriculture, Plant & Food Science
Neuroscience & Psychology
Economics, Finance & Business
Every one of the thirteen reports and thirteen position sheets is published with this edition and linked from the cards above. A single sheet with all 7,583 positions is here.
Sponsorship in writing: 168 say yes, 389 say no, 198 want authorization already, and 6,828 say nothing
This is the first edition in which the sponsorship column is populated wherever the employer said anything, because the full text of every readable posting was opened. The result is less dramatic than either optimists or pessimists expect. Ninety percent of postings are silent. Of the ten percent that speak, written refusals outnumber written commitments by more than two to one, and the single largest group of statements is the ambiguous one: applicants must already hold work authorization.
| Field | States it will sponsor | States it will not | Requires existing authorization | Silent | Silent share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Biological Sciences | 44 | 71 | 35 | 1,800 | 92% |
| Economics, Finance & Business | 29 | 79 | 37 | 951 | 87% |
| Engineering | 26 | 50 | 32 | 873 | 89% |
| Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence | 18 | 37 | 8 | 574 | 90% |
| Neuroscience & Psychology | 6 | 30 | 27 | 530 | 89% |
| Mathematics & Statistics | 14 | 27 | 16 | 485 | 89% |
| Physics & Astronomy | 1 | 19 | 11 | 506 | 94% |
| Earth, Environmental & Climate Science | 18 | 29 | 7 | 346 | 86% |
| Chemistry & Chemical Biology | 5 | 21 | 6 | 256 | 89% |
| Public Health & Epidemiology | 4 | 7 | 4 | 179 | 92% |
| Agriculture, Plant & Food Science | 3 | 10 | 7 | 112 | 85% |
| Materials Science & Nanotechnology | 0 | 8 | 2 | 114 | 92% |
| Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences | 0 | 1 | 6 | 102 | 94% |
| All fields | 168 | 389 | 198 | 6,828 | 90% |
The two lists at the top of the yes and no columns overlap. The University of Missouri states it will sponsor on 16 postings and will not on 27; the University of Arkansas, 14 and 24. Both print a sponsorship field on every requisition, so the record is clean: sponsorship there is decided role by role, by the funding and the unit, not by an institutional policy. The National Institutes of Health is the most consistent affirmative sponsor in the edition at 29 postings. The University of Colorado carries the most written refusals at 21, followed by the University of Central Florida at 15, Princeton at 14 and Oak Ridge National Laboratory at 13.
'Must be authorized to work' is not a refusal. We stopped counting it as one
Earlier editions counted any posting that required existing work authorization as a refusal to sponsor. This month we read 5,562 full postings and split the language three ways. 168 postings state they will sponsor or that non-citizens are eligible. 389 state in plain words that they will not sponsor. A further 198 require applicants to hold work authorization already, which is often boilerplate from a human-resources template and sometimes a policy, and we now label it separately.
The honest headline is unchanged: 6,828 postings, 90 percent of the list, say nothing at all. Silence is not an implicit yes, and it is not a no. The National Institutes of Health is the clearest affirmative sponsor in the edition, with 29 postings that say non-citizens are eligible. The University of Missouri and the University of Arkansas appear on both lists, 16 and 14 postings that will sponsor against 27 and 24 that will not, which is the most useful finding in the column: sponsorship is decided posting by posting, by the funding behind the role, not by the institution's name.
Thousands of postdoc jobs are not called postdoc jobs
This is the most expensive mistake in an academic job search and almost nobody knows about it. A large share of US institutions never use the word "postdoc" on a requisition. They hire the identical role under a different title, and every search run for "postdoc" returns nothing from them.
The live list shows it directly. 1,223 of the 7,583 postings are doctoral research posts whose title never says postdoc: Research Associate, Research Fellow, Research Scientist, Staff Scientist, Project Scientist, Specialist. They sit at 142 employers, and the concentrations are not marginal: Los Alamos carries 87 of them, the national laboratories together 199, and the elite universities 307. The filing record from FY2025 says the same thing about the institutions that sponsor most.
| Institution | State | Proxy-titled | Filed as "postdoc" | What it is actually called |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mayo Clinic | MN | 164 | 0 | Research Fellow |
| Massachusetts General Hospital | MA | 157 | 1 | Research Fellow |
| National Institutes of Health | MD | 148 | 0 | Research Fellow |
| Dana-Farber Cancer Institute | MA | 109 | 0 | Research Fellow |
| Harvard University | MA | 95 | 0 | Research Associate |
| Washington University in St. Louis | MO | 91 | 0 | Staff Scientist |
| University of Wisconsin-Madison | WI | 90 | 0 | Scientist I/II |
| University of Pennsylvania | PA | 85 | 0 | Research Associate |
| Brigham and Women's Hospital | MA | 76 | 0 | Research Fellow |
| Boston Children's Hospital | MA | 74 | 0 | Research Fellow |
| Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center | NY | 52 | 0 | Research Associate |
| University of Texas at Austin | TX | 39 | 0 | Research Associate |
| Top twelve shown | 1,180 | 1 | Six recurring titles |
Add Research Fellow, Research Associate, Research Scholar, Staff Scientist, Scientist I/II, Project Scientist and Investigator to every job alert. For the institutions above, search the title in the right-hand column specifically. For everyone else, search both vocabularies. The listings exist; the words are different. The explorer in section 05 already searches both: filter the role to Research Staff to see them.
Who actually files, and why the usual advice is backwards
Every cap-exempt institution could sponsor. Far fewer demonstrably do. When a department says "we only do J-1", the filing record is the evidence that this is one administrator's habit rather than an institutional policy. The Department of Labor's disclosure site has refused automated access since August, so the FY2025 analysis published in July stands this month without a FY2026 update; the field reports carry the full institution tables.
| Institution | State | Tier | Postdoc petitions | Relative volume |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| University of Michigan | MI | Elite | 179 | |
| Stanford University | CA | Elite | 129 | |
| Princeton University | NJ | Elite | 106 | |
| University of California San Francisco | CA | Elite | 99 |
The standard advice is to target lower-ranked schools because they are supposedly more willing to sponsor. The filing record says the opposite. The four highest-volume postdoc sponsors in the country are all elite institutions. Advising a researcher to avoid them for immigration reasons sends them away from where the sponsorship actually happens. The live list adds a nuance this month: Princeton, with 106 postdoc petitions in FY2025, also carries 14 written refusals in October's postings, 13 of them on postdoctoral postings and one on a faculty line. Sponsorship follows the funding behind the role, not the institution's name.
What the sector actually pays
Two sources, deliberately kept apart. The first is what employers printed in this month's postings: 2,987 of the 7,583 rows state pay, and the medians below use the midpoint of any range. The second is what cap-exempt employers put on certified FY2025 petitions, which is the floor a negotiation can cite.
| Field | Postings stating pay | Share | Median stated |
|---|---|---|---|
| Biological Sciences | 760 | 39.0% | $76,482 |
| Economics, Finance & Business | 391 | 35.7% | $130,858 |
| Engineering | 412 | 42.0% | $109,400 |
| Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence | 286 | 44.9% | $98,300 |
| Neuroscience & Psychology | 214 | 36.1% | $82,045 |
| Mathematics & Statistics | 192 | 35.4% | $95,500 |
| Physics & Astronomy | 219 | 40.8% | $95,000 |
| Earth, Environmental & Climate Science | 187 | 46.8% | $85,032 |
| Chemistry & Chemical Biology | 115 | 39.9% | $89,169 |
| Public Health & Epidemiology | 69 | 35.6% | $97,500 |
| Agriculture, Plant & Food Science | 47 | 35.6% | $85,000 |
| Materials Science & Nanotechnology | 62 | 50.0% | $101,500 |
| Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences | 33 | 30.3% | $75,954 |
| Benchmark | Value | What it means for a negotiation |
|---|---|---|
| Median offered wage | $67,830 | The midpoint of what cap-exempt employers actually put on certified petitions |
| Median DOL prevailing floor | $57,970 | The legal minimum for the occupation and metro area |
| Typical premium over floor | ≈17% | Institutions generally offer well above the floor, so the floor is rarely the constraint |
| Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory | $128,916 | DOE national labs pay roughly double the academic median and are equally cap-exempt |
The prevailing wage is the real objection to sponsorship, not the cost. If a posted salary already clears the OEWS prevailing wage for the relevant occupational code and metro area, the department's main obstacle to filing has already been met, and saying so out loud removes it. One proposal would change that arithmetic: the Department of Labor's March rule (91 FR 15454) would raise Level I from the 17th to the 34th percentile and reach every labor condition application, cap-exempt ones included. It is proposed only, with no final rule as this edition publishes.
The policy picture in October: an extension that changes nothing, two proposals that would, and the bridge nobody priced
This section is the one most likely to be out of date in any advice a candidate reads elsewhere, including this page. Verify it against the dockets before anyone files. Five measures are live as this edition publishes, and they are routinely confused with one another.
The $100,000 proclamation
Proclamation 11069 extended it to 21 September 2027. Two federal courts have set aside the agencies' implementing policies, most recently on 30 September. USCIS says the payment is not owed at this time and that it intends to collect if the orders are lifted. A change of status filed from inside the United States was never in its path.
$70,000 and $30,000 OPT fees
Proposed by ICE for a student's first and later periods of Optional Practical Training, the STEM extension included, paid by the school before the recommendation. Prospective only. For a graduating PhD this prices the usual bridge into a first postdoc; the cap-exempt H-1B, filed as a change of status from F-1, is the other bridge.
Ending the 60-day grace period
DHS would remove 8 CFR 214.1(l)(2), the window that lets an H-1B worker stay and find the next employer after a job ends. Cap exemption is no shield: it is a feature of the employer, the grace period is a feature of the status. Comments close 10 November.
$100,000 payment required for certain H-1B beneficiaries outside the United States. No exemption for universities or nonprofit research.
Chamber of Commerce and AAU v. DHS. Appealed.
The weighted selection rule gives a Level IV wage four entries and a Level I wage one. DHS states in the rule that cap-exempt petitions are untouched.
91 FR 15454. Level I would move from the 17th to the 34th percentile and Level IV from the 67th to the 88th. It would reach every labor condition application, cap-exempt ones included. Comments closed 26 May; no final rule as of this edition.
The payment is a tax, not a fee, and INA 212(f) does not reach it. The government appealed on 11 June.
211,600 registrations, down 38.5 percent from 343,981 the year before. Everyone not selected waits for the March 2027 window and an October 2027 start.
State of California v. Mullin. The appeal continues; the vacatur stands meanwhile.
91 FR 54817, docket USCIS-2026-0298. Cap-exempt filings expressly excluded. Comments closed 24 September; no final rule as of this edition.
91 FR 57807, docket USCIS-2026-0364. Removes 8 CFR 214.1(l)(2) for E, H-1B, H-1B1, L-1, O-1 and TN workers and their dependents. Cap exemption is no shield. Comments close 10 November 2026.
Signed with Executive Order 14431 on H-1B program integrity, which directs agencies to weigh employer layoffs. Published 23 September at 91 FR 60497 and 60501.
Global Nurse Force v. Trump, Judge Gilliam. The agency policies, including the extension, are set aside until notice-and-comment rulemaking is completed. Case management conference 27 October.
FY2027 cap-subject H-1B employment may start. The October Visa Bulletin moves EB-2 worldwide back to a 1 January 2025 final action date and reopens EB-2 India at 1 November 2013.
91 FR 64566, docket ICEB-2026-0100. Paid by the school before the OPT recommendation; prospective only. Comments close 9 November 2026.
More than a thousand comments were filed in its first two days.
The one most likely to touch a researcher already working at a cap-exempt employer.
The next and only chance this cycle for a cap-subject employer. Cap-exempt employers file any day between now and then.
| Proclamation 10973 / 11069 | Proposed H-1B fee | Proposed OPT fees | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Amount | $100,000 | $103,265 | $70,000 initial, $30,000 subsequent |
| Instrument | Presidential proclamations, Sep 2025 and Sep 2026 | Proposed rule, Aug 2026 | Proposed rule, Oct 2026 |
| Who it reaches | Certain H-1B beneficiaries outside the United States | All cap-subject H-1B petitions | F-1 students recommended for OPT after a final rule |
| Cap-exempt petitions | No carve-out | Excluded | Not an H-1B measure; a university can file the H-1B instead |
| Status today | Vacated and enjoined by two district courts; appeal pending in the First Circuit | Comments closed 24 Sep 2026; no final rule | Comments close 9 Nov 2026 |
If you are already in the United States on F-1, on OPT, or on a J-1 not subject to 212(e), and a cap-exempt employer files a petition requesting a change of status, none of the three fee measures touches that filing today. The OPT proposal matters to you if your bridge into the next job was going to be OPT or the STEM extension: the cap-exempt H-1B does not need either, can be filed up to six months before the start date, and costs about $960 in government fees. The grace-period proposal matters to everyone already holding H-1B status, cap-exempt or not.
Three readers, three different consequences
Ask about the H-1B before you ask about OPT
The question to put to a hiring department and its international office is whether your offer can be filed as a change of status from F-1 directly. The 1,917 postdoctoral positions in this edition are the jobs that question applies to.
Your exemption now does more work than ever
Neither H-1B fee reaches a 214(g)(5) employer's petition, and the OPT fee would fall on your institution's students. Confirm with your international office that your entity is correctly treated as exempt, particularly if you file through a research foundation or a system-wide body.
Read the grace-period proposal, then comment
The 60-day window is what stands between a grant ending and a loss of status. A specific account of what losing it would do to a research career is worth more than another voice on either fee. Docket USCIS-2026-0364, by 10 November.
We said the $100,000 proclamation would sunset on 21 September. It was extended for a year. Nothing about cap-exempt filing changed
The August and September editions said Proclamation 10973 would expire by its own terms around 21 September 2026 absent extension. On 18 September the President signed Proclamation 11069, extending the $100,000 restriction through 21 September 2027. We were right about the mechanism and wrong about the outcome, and we are correcting it here rather than quietly editing the earlier pages.
What did not change is the part that matters to a cap-exempt candidate. The payment remains blocked by two separate federal courts: the District of Massachusetts vacated the implementing policy on 8 June 2026 and the First Circuit refused to pause that ruling on 24 July; on 30 September the Northern District of California vacated and enjoined it again in Global Nurse Force v. Trump, this time reaching the September extension. USCIS says the payment is not owed at this time, and that it intends to collect if the orders are lifted. A change-of-status petition filed from inside the United States was never in its path.
The route most PhDs use into a first postdoc, F-1 OPT, now carries a proposed $70,000 price. The cap-exempt H-1B is the other bridge, and it costs about $960
On 8 October 2026 Immigration and Customs Enforcement proposed fees for Optional Practical Training: $70,000 for a student's first period of OPT and $30,000 for any later one, including the STEM extension (91 FR 64566, docket ICEB-2026-0100). The school would pay before its designated official enters the recommendation, and the rule says plainly that schools may pass the cost to students. It would apply only to recommendations made after a final rule takes effect, and comments close on 9 November 2026.
For a graduating doctoral student heading to a university or research institute, OPT was never the only bridge. A cap-exempt employer can file an H-1B petition requesting a change of status directly from F-1, on any day of the year, with government fees of roughly $960 and no lottery. The 1,917 postdoctoral positions in this edition are exactly the jobs that bridge leads to. The conversation to have with a hiring department this autumn is not 'will you sponsor me eventually' but 'can we file the H-1B instead of relying on OPT'.
If nobody has to sponsor you, nobody can say no
Everything above assumes an institution files on your behalf. For a large share of researchers that assumption is unnecessary. If your record already carries publications, citations, invited talks, grant participation or journal review work, the strongest routes are the ones you control yourself.
Three of eight criteria. Peer review of others' work, scholarly articles and original contributions of major significance all count. No cap, no LCA, no prevailing wage, dual intent.
No employer, no job offer, no PERM. Three of ten criteria plus a final merits determination. For most non-India, non-China nationals the category is current in October, and an approval converts to permanent residence with essentially no queue.
Employer-sponsored but skips PERM entirely. Three years' experience, a permanent or tenure-track offer, two of six criteria. The natural companion to a cap-exempt faculty appointment, and the reason a tenure-track line in this list is worth more than its salary.
Self-petitioned, no employer, no PERM, governed by Matter of Dhanasar. Harder since January 2025, and slower since October: the worldwide EB-2 final action date retrogressed to 1 January 2025, so a new filing now waits in a queue it did not face in August.
| Category | All chargeability | China | India |
|---|---|---|---|
| EB-1 | Current | 01 Jul 2023 | 01 Feb 2023 |
| EB-2 | 01 Jan 2025 | 01 Oct 2021 | 01 Nov 2013 |
| EB-3 | 15 May 2024 | 08 Jan 2022 | 01 Jan 2014 |
USCIS accepts employment-based adjustment filings in October against the Dates for Filing chart, under which EB-2 worldwide stands at 15 March 2026 and EB-1 China and India at 1 July 2024. A filing accepted under that chart still waits for the final action date above.
A cap-exempt H-1B is a door into academia, not a back door into industry. Under 8 CFR 214.2(h)(8)(iii)(F)(5), moving to a cap-subject employer puts you straight back into the lottery. An approved O-1A or self-petitioned EB-1A removes that ceiling. Filed together, the position funds you while the petition frees you. The October bulletin sharpens the point: EB-2 worldwide is no longer current, EB-2 India has reopened at November 2013, and EB-1 remains current for everyone outside China and India, which makes EB-1A the decisive filing for a strong record in any field on this page.
You have the data. Now build the case.
Finding the position is the first half. The second is the petition, and that is where most strong candidates lose ground they never needed to lose. We draft and review cases for researchers, clinicians and academics, and we tell you plainly when the honest answer is "not yet, and here is what to build first".