Sidebar Banner ImageSidebar Banner ImageSidebar Banner Image
  1. Home
  2. Latest Information
  3. AAO Corrects Inconsistent Officer Interpretation of Support Letters Under New USCIS Policy Manual

AAO Corrects Inconsistent Officer Interpretation of Support Letters Under New USCIS Policy Manual

In a significant success for North America Immigration Law Group (Chen Immigration Law Group), the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) recently withdrew a Service Center Operations (SCOPS) denial. This case provides a roadmap for EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW) petitioners, highlighting a critical shift in how evidence should be evaluated following the 2025 updates to the USCIS Policy Manual.


Background: The Strategic Value of "Dependent" Support Letters

Historically, USCIS adjudicators often prioritized "independent" support letters from experts who had never worked with the petitioner, viewing them as more objective. However, our firm’s extensive experience with USCIS and AAO trends noted a pivotal change:
In January 2025, USCIS updated its Policy Manual to prioritize the quality of first-hand information.
 
The manual now emphasizes support letters from individuals with first-hand knowledge of the applicant's work. Because these "dependent" experts, such as research advisors and project collaborators, can describe specific achievements and methodologies in detail, they have become essential to a successful NIW strategy. Consequently, North America Immigration Law Group began advising clients to focus on these high-detail support letters to meet the "well-positioned" requirement of the Dhanasar framework.
 
 
The Case: Overcoming a Denial

The Petitioner, an electrical engineer and doctoral student at the University of Pennsylvania, is developing advanced ferroelectric memory technology for extreme environments like aerospace and defense. Despite the clear alignment with national interests, SCOPS denied the petition.
 
In the RFE and subsequent denial, the officer:
 
• Failed to value dependent support letters, focusing instead on the idea that each piece of evidence was insufficient by itself rather than looking at the "totality" of the record.
 
• Ignored the 2025 Policy Manual updates, which expressly state that experts with first-hand knowledge are uniquely qualified to attest to a petitioner's capabilities.
 
• Dismissed the "National Importance" of the work, despite evidence that the research would be publicly circulated in peer-reviewed journals.
 
 
 
The AAO Decision: Validating Our Firm’s Strategy

Upon review, the AAO withdrew the Director's decision. While this is a non-precedent decision, it confirms our firm's interpretation of how the 2025 Policy Manual updates should be applied. The AAO noted that letters are highly persuasive when they come from experts who "describe achievements" and "provide specific examples" based on first-hand knowledge.
 
 
Specifically, the AAO highlighted:

•Expert Testimony: Support letters from UPenn faculty members were "persuasive" because they confirmed the Petitioner's "distinctive expertise" and "track record of success".
 
•Direct Impact: The Petitioner’s role in conceiving technology, evidenced by being named on a patent application, proved he was playing a "significant role" rather than a mere ancillary one.
 
•Critical Technologies: The work relates to "critical and emerging technology," which the USCIS Policy Manual now identifies as a strong positive factor.


Conclusion for NIW Petitioners

This successful appeal by North America Immigration Law Group demonstrates that detailed support letters from first-hand collaborators are a cornerstone of a modern NIW petition. As the AAO confirmed, these letters should not be dismissed simply because they are "dependent".
 
If you are an advanced degree professional or a researcher in a critical field, ensuring your support letters align with the latest USCIS Policy Manual is essential. Our firm remains at the forefront of these policy shifts to ensure our clients' work receives the weight it deserves.
 

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.