2 I-140 Approvals After RFE on March 10, 2026

2026-03-11, BY wegreened

A Request for Evidence, or RFE, is not a final adjudication outcome. In many I-140 cases, it reflects the officer’s demand for clearer evidentiary linkage, tighter legal framing, or more direct support for how the record satisfies the governing standard.

The following two success stories highlight I-140 approvals that moved forward despite RFE-related complications. Although the sample is small, both matters show how approval can still be secured when the petition remains grounded in objective credentials, a responsive adjudication strategy, and a record that is coherent enough to withstand additional scrutiny.

Cases With Inherent Challenges

Service Center Transfers During Adjudication

Both approvals involved movement between service centers rather than remaining in a single adjudicative track. One EB-1B case was transferred from the Nebraska Service Center to the Texas Service Center and proceeded without premium processing, while the NIW matter moved from the Texas Service Center to the Nebraska Service Center. Procedural movement of this kind can complicate adjudication because the file must remain internally consistent even as review shifts across officers and locations.

Mixed Processing Strategies After RFE

The two matters also reflect different post-RFE processing paths. One approval remained in regular processing and reached a documented 518-day timeline, while the other proceeded on a premium processing upgrade. This contrast illustrates that there is no single route to success after an RFE, and that case strategy may depend heavily on the procedural posture reflected in the record.

Strong Research Profiles Facing Additional Scrutiny

These approvals involved applicants with solid research-based credentials, including Ph.D.-level training, peer-reviewed publication records, and citation histories that showed measurable external reliance. Even so, both petitions still encountered RFE scrutiny, which underscores a common feature of I-140 adjudication: a strong profile alone does not eliminate the need for precise legal positioning and a record that allows the officer to connect the evidence to the petition standard without gaps.

EB-1B Approvals After RFE (1)

#1: EB-1B in Vaccine Development

This EB-1B approval involved an applicant born in India and residing in the United States, who proposes to continue their current employment as a Research Associate. The petition was filed in Vaccine Development and received an RFE from Officer XM1421 before ultimately reaching approval.

The applicant held a Ph.D. and presented a research record that included 14 publications, 148 citations, and a latest peer-reviewed publication dated 2024, with four recommendation letters supporting the case.

The matter proceeded through a non-premium track and was transferred from the Nebraska Service Center to the Texas Service Center, with a total documented processing time of 518 days.

Notable: This case required persistence across a longer, procedurally complex review path, ultimately securing approval under Officer XM1421 after an inter-service-center transfer and an extended 518-day regular adjudication timeline.

NIW Approvals After RFE (1)

#2: NIW in Synthetic Organic Chemistry

This NIW approval involved an applicant born in India and residing in the United States, who proposes to continue in their current role as a Research Scientist. The petition was filed in Synthetic Organic Chemistry and received an RFE from Officer EX0832 before approval.

The applicant held a Ph.D. and submitted a record including 11 publications, 233 citations, and a most recent peer-reviewed publication from 2023, supported by four recommendation letters.

Unlike the EB-1B matter above, this case moved from the Texas Service Center to the Nebraska Service Center and proceeded with a premium processing upgrade.

Notable: This case serves as a prime example of how an NIW petition can survive RFE scrutiny (under Officer EX0832) and venue transfer, leveraging a premium processing upgrade to push a strong record across the finish line.

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.