A Request for Evidence (RFE) or Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) is not the end of a case. It is often a sign of adjudication complexity, where the officer is testing whether the record clearly satisfies the legal standard and whether the evidence is organized in a way that supports each required element without gaps. The following four success stories are I-140 petitions that faced heightened scrutiny through an RFE or NOID but were ultimately approved.

---

Cases With Inherent Challenges

RFE and NOID scrutiny tied to officer review

These cases in this batch were reviewed under an RFE or NOID issued by a specific officer identifier (for example, XM2115, XM1986, and XM2365). When a case receives this level of targeted scrutiny, the response typically must do more than add documents. It must directly address the officer’s concerns and reframe the evidentiary record so the approval standard is satisfied in a clear, step-by-step way.

Long non-premium timelines and service center transfers

This set also includes cases that moved through multiple service centers and one that remained in regular processing for a long period. Transfers and long timelines frequently correlate with closer review and procedural complexity, which makes the structure and consistency of the record especially important when responding to an RFE.

Low citation volume and early-career positioning

At least one NIW approval in this group involved modest citation counts relative to typical NIW expectations, and another involved an early-career profile transitioning into a postdoctoral role. In these scenarios, the response often needs to connect the proposed endeavor to clear U.S. benefit while also showing credible momentum through publications, recent activity, and other objective indicators.

---

EB-1B Approval After NOID (1)

#1: EB-1B in Analytical Chemistry

Our client, born in Canada and currently residing in the United States, is a full professor continuing in the same employment. The petition was approved under EB-1B in Analytical Chemistry after the case received a NOID issued by officer XM2115.

At the time of filing, the applicant had 10 publications and 111 citations, with the latest peer-reviewed publication year listed as 2023, and held a Ph.D. in a STEM field.

This case also reflects procedural complexity in the adjudication path. The petition moved from NSC to TSC and then returned to NSC, and it proceeded with a premium processing upgrade strategy. The evidentiary record included 4 recommendation letters and no testimonial letters, supporting the case presentation through external expert assessment, while the response addressed the heightened concerns reflected by the NOID.

Notable: The case received a NOID from officer XM2115 and was transferred from NSC to TSC and then back to NSC before approval.

---

NIW Approvals After RFE (3)

#2: NIW in Ecology and Agriculture

Our client, born in Nepal and currently residing in the United States, is a Postdoctoral Research Associate transitioning to an Assistant Professor role. The NIW petition in Ecology and Agriculture was approved after receiving an RFE issued by officer XM1986. 

At the time of submission of the petition, the applicant had 3 publications and 31 citations, with the latest peer-reviewed publication year listed as 2023, and a Ph.D. in a STEM field.

This case proceeded with a premium processing upgrade and experienced service center transfers, moving from NSC to TSC and then back to NSC. With no recommendation letters or testimonial letters listed, the response needed to rely on the documentary record itself to clarify the proposed endeavor and show that the petitioner’s trajectory and evidence met the NIW framework despite the RFE.

Notable: The case received an RFE and was transferred from NSC to TSC and back to NSC before approval, without any recommendation or testimonial letters.

---

#3: NIW in Cancer Immunology

Our client, born in Romania and currently residing in the United States, is a Ph.D. candidate moving into a Postdoctoral Associate position. The NIW petition in Cancer Immunology was approved after receiving an RFE issued by officer XM2365. 

At the time of filing, the applicant held an M.Sc., had 8 publications and 178 citations, and the latest peer-reviewed publication year was listed as 2024.

Unlike many RFE cases that shift into premium processing, this petition remained in non-premium processing with a processing time of 760 days. The petition was supported by 4 recommendation letters and no testimonial letters, thereby offering independent expert validation.

Notable: The case shows an RFE from officer XM2365 and an approval after 760 days in non-premium processing.

---

#4: NIW in Cancer Biology

Our client, born in Sri Lanka and currently residing in the United States, is a Research Fellow continuing in the same employment. The NIW petition in Cancer Biology was approved after receiving an RFE issued by officer XM1986. 

At filing, the applicant had 18 publications and 18 citations, with the latest peer-reviewed publication year listed as 2024, and a Ph.D. in a STEM field.

This case proceeded at TSC with a premium processing upgrade and included no recommendation letters or testimonial letters. Where citation volume is modest relative to publication count, an RFE response often needs to present the evidence in a way that makes the national importance and the applicant’s positioning easy to follow, relying on the documented record to show why the work warrants a waiver of the labor certification requirement.

Notable: The case received an RFE from officer XM1986 and was approved with a premium processing upgrade at TSC despite no recommendation or testimonial letters.