2 I-140 Approvals After RFE on March 16, 2026
2026-03-17, BY wegreened
A Request for Evidence, or RFE, is not a final adjudication outcome. In many I-140 filings, it reflects the adjudicating officer’s need for clearer evidentiary linkage, tighter legal framing, or a more direct explanation of how the petition satisfies the governing standard. Even cases that ultimately succeed may face additional scrutiny when the procedural history includes a prior denial, a refiling strategy, or an evidentiary profile that does not fit the familiar research-driven pattern.
The following two success stories highlight I-140 approvals secured after prior RFE-related complications. These success stories include one EB-1A approval and one NIW approval. Together, these cases show that approval after an RFE depends not only on the applicant’s background, but also on whether the filing remains coherent, well supported, and durable enough to withstand closer review.
Cases With Inherent Challenges
Prior RFE History and Refiling
One of these approvals relied on a successful refiling strategy after an earlier NIW petition received an RFE from Officer XM1899 and was subsequently denied. This procedural history created a complicated path, as the later filing had to remain persuasive despite an earlier adverse outcome in the same category.
A Non-Researcher EB-1A Profile Without a Publication Record
The EB-1A approval stands out because it did not rest on a conventional research profile. The applicant worked in Technology Strategy, was identified as a non-researcher, and presented no publications or citations at all. This demonstrates that post-RFE scrutiny can also apply to cases evaluated through a completely different evidentiary lens than the familiar academic profile.
Different Premium Processing Paths
These two approvals also reflect different procedural strategies. One case moved forward with upfront premium processing, while the other reached approval through a premium processing upgrade after an earlier denied filing. This contrast proves there is no single post-RFE path to success.
Uneven Scholarly Records Under Continued Scrutiny
The two approved matters also reflect very different evidentiary profiles. One applicant secured approval with no publications and no citations, while the other presented 6 publications and 105 citations with a latest peer-reviewed publication from 2024. That range underscores a recurring feature of post-RFE adjudication, namely that officers do not assess numbers alone, but whether the full record remains persuasive under the applicable standard.
EB-1A Approvals After RFE (1)
#1: EB-1A in Technology Strategy
Born in India and residing in the United States, this Associate Director proposed to remain in the same role. The petition, filed as a non-researcher EB-1A in Technology Strategy, successfully overcame an RFE to reach approval.
Holding a STEM master’s degree, the applicant did not present any publications or citations. Instead, the filing included four recommendation letters and two testimonial letters, reflecting an evidentiary presentation built around a different type of professional record.
The case was adjudicated at the Texas Service Center and proceeded with upfront premium processing.
Notable: This case stands out for securing EB-1A approval after an RFE in a non-researcher category without any publications or citations.
NIW Approvals After RFE (1)
#2: NIW in Chemical Engineering
This NIW approval involved an applicant from Bangladesh residing in the United States, working as a Postdoctoral Fellow and proposing to remain in the same role. The initial NIW petition received an RFE from Officer XM1899 and was subsequently denied. The case was later refiled and finally approved, overcoming a more complex process than a standard first-time application.
The applicant held a STEM Ph.D. and presented 6 publications, 105 citations, and a latest peer-reviewed publication from 2024. The case also included six recommendation letters and one testimonial letter.
The case remained at the Texas Service Center through a premium processing upgrade.
Notable: This case highlights a successful refiling strategy, securing NIW approval after a prior petition received an RFE and was denied.The key to our success is the way in which we present supporting evidence and provide the highest quality petition letters. With over 64,000 I-140 EB-1 ( EB-1A Alien of Extraordinary Ability; EB-1B Outstanding Researcher or Professor), EB-2 NIW (National Interest Waiver) and O-1 approvals, our firm has acquired substantial information about USCIS decisions, which gives us significant advantage over firms that only handle a small number of cases.
Based on our close track of USCIS internal memoranda, AAO decisions, and judicial review decisions, we have unique insight into the USCIS adjudication trends. Not only do we apply this insight into our approaches to our clients' cases, but we also carefully review all RFEs (Requests for Evidence), NOIDs (Notices of Intent to Deny), approvals, and denials issued on our cases so that we can further increase our understanding of USCIS strategies and decision-making processes. With the insight, we are able to advise our clients on the best ways to proceed with their petitions.
While other petitioners and attorneys may still use templates to draft recommendation letters or petition letters, our clients' recommendation letters and petition letters are tailored to their individual credentials to best persuade a USCIS officer that our clients meet the requirements of the category they are applying under and therefore their petitions deserve to be approved. To provide the best EB-1 and EB-2 NIW services, our law firm only selects attorneys who have received their professional Juris Doctor degrees from the top law schools in the U.S. and who have garnered rigorous analytical skills through years of experience.