Success Story: Strategic RFE Response Turns Structural Engineering NIW Challenge into Approval
Client’s Testimonial:
"I am very grateful to the attorneys at North America Immigration Law Group for their exceptional work on my EB-2 NIW petition. When my case received an RFE, the team developed a strong and well-organized strategy that directly addressed USCIS’s concerns and clearly demonstrated the broader significance of my work in structural engineering. Throughout the process, the attorneys were professional, knowledgeable, and highly responsive to my questions. Their careful preparation and strategic approach ultimately led to the approval of my petition. I highly recommend their services to anyone pursuing an EB-2 NIW.”
On July 27th, 2026, we received another EB-2 NIW (National Interest Waiver) approval for an Associate in the Field of Structural Engineering (Approval Notice).
General Field: Structural Engineering
Position at the Time of Case Filing: Associate
Country of Origin: Egypt
State of Residence at the Time of Filing: Illinois
Approval Notice Date: July 27th, 2026
Processing Time: 11 months, 5 days (Premium Processing Requested)
Case Summary:
What began as a petition centered on safer and more durable civil infrastructure became a more complex case when USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) on March 10th, 2026. The petition had been filed on August 22nd, 2025, and a premium processing upgrade was submitted on February 25th, 2026. Although USCIS accepted that the proposed endeavor had substantial merit, the RFE questioned its national importance and whether the client was well positioned to advance it. In particular, USCIS characterized the client's work as primarily providing engineering services benefiting an employer and specific projects rather than producing implications extending more broadly across the field.
Our RFE strategy therefore began by correcting the framework through which the endeavor was being evaluated. North America Immigration Law Group (Chen Immigration Law Associates) distinguished the client's proposed employment from the proposed endeavor itself. We also emphasized the applicable preponderance of the evidence standard and asked USCIS to evaluate the evidence collectively rather than treating individual pieces in isolation. The response then connected the endeavor to broader U.S. concerns involving aging and load-posted bridges, infrastructure expenditures, public safety, transportation reliability, and economic resilience.
The second major part of our response addressed USCIS's concerns about whether the client was well positioned to pursue this work. The original filing documented 8 peer-reviewed journal articles and 2 peer-reviewed conference articles, along with 65 citations. By the RFE stage, the client's citation count had increased to 107.
Rather than relying on citation numbers alone, the RFE response showed how other researchers had actively applied the client's findings. This evidence transformed the citation record from a numerical metric into concrete examples of independent reliance and implementation.
We also directly addressed USCIS's treatment of the recommendation letters and research funding. The response explained that the expert letters contained specific descriptions of the client's contributions and were corroborated by objective evidence. Regarding funding, we clarified that the client was not claiming personal ownership of a grant. Instead, the evidence demonstrated the client's instrumental contribution to a bridge preservation framework connected to a publicly funded transportation initiative.
The RFE response ultimately presented a more complete picture of the client's trajectory: research published in respected engineering venues, growing and independently generated citations, documented implementation by other researchers, participation in publicly funded infrastructure work, and concrete plans to continue developing scalable approaches to infrastructure safety and preservation. This expanded record directly addressed the issues USCIS had raised while keeping the analysis anchored to the Matter of Dhanasar framework. The result demonstrated how a carefully targeted RFE response can clarify the broader significance of engineering work that might otherwise be viewed too narrowly through the lens of a particular employer or project.