Success Story: Our Firm Overcame Officer XM2232’s Denial and Secured the Client’s NIW I-140 Approval

At North America Immigration Law Group (NAILG), we understand that the NIW process can be unpredictable, even for highly qualified professionals. When a denial happens despite a strong petition, our job is to challenge incorrect reasoning, rebuild the case with sharper evidence and law, and push for the fair outcome the client deserves. This success story highlights how NAILG guided a client in pharmaceutical sciences through an RFE, an unfair denial issued by Officer XM2232, and a carefully argued appeal that ultimately led to I-140 approval.

NIW Petition

NAILG filed the client’s EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW) I-140 petition on March 18, 2024. The petition presented the client as an advanced degree professional and an expert in pharmaceutical sciences. The proposed endeavor focused on designing, synthesizing, and developing drug nanocarriers for innovative drug delivery strategies aimed at managing and treating metabolic and infectious diseases.

In the petition, we framed the case around the Matter of Dhanasar’s three-prong test:

Prong 1: Substantial Merit and National Importance
We demonstrated that the client’s nanocarrier work supports critical U.S. goals in advanced engineering materials, nanomanufacturing, and biotechnologies. These areas are federally recognized as critical and emerging technologies, and the endeavor directly contributes to national public health and technological leadership.
Prong 2: Well Positioned to Advance the Endeavor
We documented the client’s strong research foundation, including peer-reviewed publications, first-author contributions, and a growing citation record. The petition emphasized that the client’s education, expertise, and demonstrated success placed the client in a strong position to move the endeavor forward in the United States.
Prong 3: On Balance, Waiver Benefits the United States
We argued that the importance and urgency of the client’s work justified waiving the labor certification requirement, because the United States benefits from the endeavor regardless of the availability of U.S. workers in the field.

Request for Evidence (RFE) from Officer XM2232

On August 28, 2024, USCIS issued an RFE signed by Officer XM2232. The RFE questioned all three Dhanasar prongs and imposed requirements that went beyond NIW standards.

Key challenges raised included:

Prong 1 Concerns
The officer faulted the petition for not including a professional or business plan, not detailing “innovative and new techniques,” and not showing an ability to hire or employ U.S. workers for economic benefit. These demands are not required under Dhanasar and reflect an improper shift toward business visa-style criteria.
Prong 2 Concerns
The RFE argued the record did not prove the client was well-positioned, stating that citations were not “frequent” enough and that the client had not served as an “impetus for progress.” The officer also questioned why a Ph.D. was listed on a CV without a diploma at filing, even though the client relied on a qualifying master’s degree for EB-2 eligibility.
Prong 3 Concerns
The RFE concluded that the waiver had not been shown to benefit the United States, tying this finding to the officer’s doubts about Prongs 1 and 2.

NAILG’s RFE Response

NAILG prepared a thorough response explaining the officer’s legal errors and strengthening the evidentiary record. We emphasized that NIW petitions are evaluated under a preponderance standard and that the officer was incorrectly imposing heightened requirements.

Our response included:

Updated achievements and impact evidence
We reaffirmed that the original filing already showed a credible record of success, including eight peer-reviewed journal articles (four first-authored) and at least sixty-eight citations at filing, with one article ranking among the top ten percent most highly cited in its journal.
Clarification of degree eligibility
We explained that the client’s master’s degree met the advanced degree requirement. To address the officer’s confusion, we also submitted the Ph.D. diploma that was awarded after filing, along with a formal evaluation, making clear that the Ph.D. was supplemental rather than a filing basis.
Prong 1 reinforcement
We showed that requiring a business plan or proof of hiring U.S. workers was a novel extra burden not supported by Dhanasar. We tied the endeavor directly to critical and emerging technology priorities and U.S. public health needs.
Prong 2 reinforcement
We argued that the RFE improperly used EB-1A-style language. We supported the client’s positioning with expanded citation evidence, scholarly influence, and consistent expert letters praising the client’s contributions and future plan.

Denial Issued by Officer XM2232

Despite the detailed response, USCIS denied the petition, with the online denial reflected on November 27, 2024, and the formal decision dated December 2, 2024. The denial again signed by Officer XM2232 repeated the same flawed conclusions:

National importance not established
USCIS minimized the endeavor’s connection to federally recognized critical technologies and treated the effort as too general despite clear evidence linking the work to national priorities.
The client is not well-positioned
The officer dismissed the client’s publication record and citation impact using a standard closer to extraordinary ability, not NIW.
Waiver not beneficial on balance
Because the officer denied Prongs 1 and 2, Prong 3 was rejected automatically rather than independently assessed.

The denial also included factual misstatements about the client’s education history, showing that the record had not been fully or fairly reviewed.

Appeal to the AAO and Reversal

NAILG filed Form I-290B immediately after the denial. The appeal was mailed on December 26, 2024, and received by USCIS on December 27, 2024. We requested a de novo review and argued that Officer XM2232 had abused discretion by applying a heightened standard and ignoring key evidence.

In the appeal, we emphasized:

The petition met the preponderance standard and should not have been judged by stricter EB-1A-type expectations.
The proposed endeavor advanced federally recognized critical and emerging technologies, proving national importance.
Objective impact data submitted in the RFE response placed the client among the top performers in citation impact and research productivity, supporting strong positioning.
The denial mischaracterized the educational record even after corrections, showing factual and legal error.
On balance, waiving labor certification benefits the United States due to the value and urgency of the client’s nanocarrier research for public health.

NIW Approval and Outlook

On April 30, 2025, the Administrative Appeals Office sustained the appeal and withdrew the Service Center’s denial. The AAO confirmed that the client satisfied all three Dhanasar prongs, finding that the endeavor had national importance, the client was well-positioned to advance it, and granting the waiver would benefit the United States even if other qualified U.S. workers were available. Following the AAO decision, USCIS approved the I-140 petition, and the approval notice was received by the firm around November 20, 2025.

This case shows the real difference skilled advocacy makes after a denial. Officer XM2232’s decision imposed unsupported requirements and misread strong evidence, but NAILG’s appeal restored the proper legal framework and secured the approval the client had earned. We are proud to have guided the client through this difficult path and remain committed to defending deserving NIW petitions through every stage of the process.

Our Firm’s Approach After a Denial:

With the USCIS NIW approval rate dropping to 62.78% in the first quarter of FY2025 (see here), denials are becoming more common—even for otherwise strong cases. That’s why it’s essential to understand how your attorney can support you strategically and proactively after a denial. At our firm, we don’t view a denial as the end of the case. We carefully analyze the officer’s reasoning and advise most clients to pursue both a refile and an appeal when appropriate.

Although appeal approvals are rare—of the nearly 1,400 AAO NIW appeals filed in FY2024, only 15 were sustained and 90 remanded (see here)—an appeal offers a key benefit: it preserves your original priority date. This can be critical if your appeal is sustained, as it may allow you to file your I-485 adjustment of status sooner, without waiting for a new priority date to become current.

Because we believe in the strength of our cases, for clients under our Approval or Refund® service, we pay the USCIS filing fee for either the appeal or the refile. We are committed to standing by your case and giving it every possible opportunity to succeed.

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 58,000 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 cumulative total of approved cases grew from 600 in 2013 to over 58,000 in 2025.