Some Thoughts on Responding to RFE (Request For Evidence) Cases Originally Filed by Other Law Firms or Clients

Some Thoughts on Responding to RFE (Request For Evidence) Cases Originally Filed by Other Law Firms or Clients

Because of our approval rate and reputation, we at Chen Immigration Law Associates are constantly approached by clients after they received an RFE (Request for Evidence), NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) or a denial letter. We therefore have the chance to review many petition letters and petition packages prepared by other attorneys or clients themselves. Every once in a while, we encountered petitions with very low quality. For example, we are filing a motion to reopen and reconsider for an EB-1 case and found the original attorney did not even quote the correct statute.

Regardless of the challenging nature of these cases, we were able to help many clients have their cases approved after responding to RFE or NOID or re-filing their cases.

Most of the time, we helped respond to RFE (Requests for Evidence) for individuals who have self-filed their petition or worked with another attorney. Each RFE is unique to the petition; however, we at Chen Immigration Law Associates have observed some common errors that can be avoided in the petitions to reduce the chance of receiving a complicated RFE.

Not Arguing Based on Pertinent Law or USCIS Regulations

We at Chen Immigration Law Associates constantly reviewed petition letters drafted by clients or other attorneys; on many occasions we have noticed these letters were not argued based on the most update or accurate precedents or USCIS regulations.

For examples, all EB-1A (EB1-EA) Alien of Extraordinary Ability, and EB1B (EB1-OR) Outstanding Researcher/Professor cases are adjudicated based on the standards of law set by Kazarian v. USCIS, 2010 WL 725317 (9th Cir. March 4, 2010)

Karzarian case is a recent court decision that has clarified the approach immigration officers should use when evaluating evidence submitted. Karzarian case instructs that the evidence in a case should first be counted, and then if qualifying under at least three criteria should be considered in terms of its final merits. This case is extremely important in EB-1(A) and EB-1(B) cases, and immigration officers expect the petition to address this two part approach. Since the case was recently released, many individuals and attorneys have not been presenting evidence in a way that addresses the two part approach. This is leading to many unnecessary RFEs.

All the petition letters prepared by Chen Immigration Law Associates are argued based on the most pertinent cases, precedents and USCIS memos, which leads to our extremely high approval rate.

Poor Presentation of Evidence

Another common issue we at Chen Immigration Law Associates has observed in petitions filed by other attorneys or clients is poorly presented evidence. Even if a beneficiary has good credentials, failure to present evidence of the beneficiary’s abilities in a clear and precise way will lead the immigration officer to underestimate the merits of the beneficiary’s work and accomplishments. The burden to proof for I-140 petitions falls entirely on the petitioner and poor presentation of evidence will lead to RFE or even denial. An immigration officer is not required to find additional evidence to answer questions raised in the petition.

We at Chen Immigration Law Associates always present evidence in the most clear and complete way. We make sure that it is easy for the immigration officer to understand our clients’ accomplishments and work. In addition, we tailor each petition to the individual, their work, and their qualifications.

Empty Statements without Substantive Evidence of Support

We at Chen Immigration Law Associates also noticed many EB1A (EB1-EA) and EB1B (EB1-OR) petitions claiming too many regulatory criteria, even when it does not apply to the individual and ended up getting RFE or denial. We always remind our clients that it is not an effective method to claim criteria without substantial evidence of support because it will most certainly result in an RFE. We have observed many firms use a copy-and-paste method drafting petition letters, repeating the languagesof law without providing substantive evidence. To make sure our clients always obtain approval within the shortest possible time, we at Chen Immigration Law Associates include detailed and comprehensive discussion of clients’ credentials, presenting the case with a tailored and extensive index of exhibits and make sure the immigration officer can understand the essence of our clients’ achievements.

Submitting Evidence with Low Quality

Another common mistake we have observed at Chen Immigration Law Associates is that many attorneys and clients did not provide the “best” evidence to support the beneficiary’s qualifications. A petition could be denied simply because evidence provided is with low quality that was not deemed reliable or sufficient. In these cases, providing evidence from reliable sources could have made the difference between denial and approval. Often, an RFE (Request for Evidence) requires better quality of evidence. We at Chen Immigration Law Associates always help clients to provide the best evidence from the start. We are aware of what immigration officers are looking for, and what types of insufficient evidence will likely trigger an RFE.

The visa process can be complicated and properly presenting a petition will increase the chance of approval substantially. We at Chen Immigration Law Associates have helped hundreds of clients avoid these common mistakes by creating a clear petition that meets all USCIS expectations and successfully have their cases approved.

North America Immigration Law Group (Chen Immigration Law Associates) is a U.S. immigration law firm dedicated to representing corporations, research institutions, and individuals from all 50 U.S. states regarding I-140 immigration petitions. We specialize in employment-based immigration petition and have a proven record of high success rate for the categories of: EB2-NIW (National Interest Waiver), EB1-A (Alien of Extraordinary Ability), EB1-B (Outstanding Researcher/Professor) and O-1 (Alien of Extraordinary Ability).

Our Ten Thousand I-140 Approvals Provide Unprecedented Insight into the USCIS Adjudication Trend

With more than 47,000 EB-1A, EB-1B, EB-2 NIW and O-1 cases approved, we have first hand information on the manner in which the USCIS adjudicate I-140 cases. As the USCIS has constantly changed its adjudication standards for the EB-1A, EB-1B and EB-2 NIW categories, our firm's huge database of successful cases gives you unprecedented insight to USCIS adjudication trends. We carefully analyze the data for all of our cases and apply the results of our analyses toward giving our clients up-to-date advice and adapting our strategies such that we remain on par with the ever-shifting landscape of immigration law in the U.S. With us, you will always have access to important updates, strategies, and information so that you can make the most informed decisions about your case.

We Have Helped Hundreds and Thousands of Clients with Credentials and Backgrounds Similar to Yours

With our exceedingly large number of successful petitions, no matter what credentials you have, no matter your background and field of expertise, no matter your visa status or nationality, chances are we have helped hundreds or even thousands of clients just like you. Our clients are usually impressed with how well we understand their research and work. Our insight and understanding stems from the fact that we have handled many cases with elements similar to yours already, and this helps us devise the best strategies for each individual petition.

Vast Majority of Clients Came to Us Because of Referrals

For years, our firm has attracted new clients based solely on word of mouth, recommendations, and the positive collaboration experiences shared with them by their friends and family. We take pride in our reputation and work hard to ensure that we provide a green card application experience that our clients are happy to share with their friends and colleagues. That is how our approved cases grew from 600 in 2013 to over 47,000 in 2023.