-
Home
-
Latest Information
-
EB1A Case Approved Following the Appeal of a Denial Decision in TSC
EB1A Case Approved Following the Appeal of a Denial Decision in TSC
2025-01-05, BY wegreened
At North America Immigration Law Group, we understand that even the most highly qualified individuals can face challenges in navigating the U.S. immigration system, particularly when applying for extraordinary ability visas. Success in these cases often requires not only stellar credentials but also the ability to present evidence in a way that satisfies stringent USCIS criteria. One recent case, involving a highly skilled neuroscientist, exemplifies how complex the path to approval can be, even for the most accomplished professionals.
We submitted an EB1A petition to the Texas Service Center, which was denied on June 29, 2024 following a Request for Evidence (RFE). However, due to numerous problems associated with the denial decision, we appealed the decision with the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO). Finally, AAO reopened the case and issued approval for EB1A petition on August 6th, 2024.
EB1A Petition
In March 2023, we had the privilege of filing an I-140 petition for our client, a brilliant neuroscientist seeking EB1A approval. Her credentials were impressive: 234 citations, 6 peer-reviewed publications, 10 peer-reviews, and membership in the prestigious International Society of Neurochemistry. With such qualifications, she seemed to epitomize the “Extraordinary Ability” category. However, the path to success proved more challenging than expected.
Request for Evidence (RFE) and Denial
Following the petition’s submission, an RFE (Request for Evidence) arrived from Officer XM1852, questioning our client’s ability to satisfy the “Original Contributions of Major Significance” criterion. Despite submitting substantial evidence, including her scientific articles, independent citations, recommendation letters, and peer-review documentation, the officer deemed this insufficient to prove that her contributions had a significant impact on the field of neuroscience. The officer dismissed the recommendation letters as being too general, claiming they didn’t adequately explain how her research uniquely advanced her discipline.
Despite her strong citation count and the recognition of her research, the officer issued a denial, arguing that the evidence failed to demonstrate widespread implementation or influence from experts in the field. The denial suggested that the recommendation letters simply indicated that our client’s papers had been cited, without providing sufficient proof that her work was broadly applied or stood out from others in neuroscience.
We found the officer’s decision deeply flawed. Not only did the denial lack a thorough analysis of the evidence, but it also failed to apply the “preponderance of the evidence” standard, a key requirement in EB1A adjudications. Significant aspects of her case—such as her independent citation record, publications in highly ranked journals, and funding from prestigious institutions—were overlooked, while the officer relied on templated responses to reject the petition.
Appeal & Approval
In our appeal to the AAO (Administrative Appeals Office), we highlighted the unreasonable nature of the denial. We carefully outlined how the officer had ignored critical evidence, including her independent citations, reputable funding, and the detailed recommendation letters. Citing precedent cases like Matter of Chawathe and Kazarian v. USCIS, we emphasized that the officer had failed to weigh the probative value of the evidence properly.
The AAO agreed with our arguments and concluded that Officer XM1852 had erred in the evaluation. They found that the officer had not adequately reviewed the recommendation letters or given appropriate consideration to the other evidence demonstrating the significance of our client’s contributions. Consequently, the AAO remanded the case with instructions for a proper re-evaluation based on their guidance. On August 6, 2024, after further review, the petition was finally approved, marking a well-deserved victory.
Our Goal
At North America Immigration Law Group, we take pride in guiding our clients through the intricacies of immigration law, particularly in challenging categories like EB1A. Our team’s expertise in building strong, persuasive petitions and our unwavering dedication to client success are what set us apart. Whether it’s overcoming RFEs or contesting denials, we are committed to ensuring our clients’ achievements are recognized and their immigration goals fulfilled.
The key to our success is the way in which we present supporting evidence and provide the highest quality petition letters. With over 47,000 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.
