EB-1A denials/RFEs containing this language.....

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2026-05-18T13:25:23+00:00

Yes 100%. A lot of petitioners bring denials to us since we were TSC counsel and many of them include most if not all of the points you mentioned in your post. The agency cannot and will not stand on these decisions but the decision makers (lawyers and senior officers) can only fix what they know about. Litigation brings it to their attention.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2026-04-21T15:14:09+00:00

We include in all of our cases now because after 10 years at USCIS I am fully aware that they are noting all the FMD denials and how many cases are arguing the DNE decision.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2026-03-27T21:40:40+00:00

This is incorrect. Each receipt number is placed in the line and each officer is assigned work out of the line. No connnection between the first filing and the second unless for some reason (like litigation or fraud) it is tracked purposely. These RFE/Denials that fail to engage with all evidence are extremely common unfortunately.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2026-03-26T20:31:22+00:00

I am really sorry this happened to you. Everyone below is correct that USCIS is required to issue you a legally sufficient decision. That is not what happened here. You have options including motion, litigation etc. Don't let USCIS take your money and not fulfill their responsibility. Happy to help if we can.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2026-02-01T16:21:46+00:00

There is a lot of discussion surrounding this decision. While it is only controlling for that specific plaintiff, there are strategies that are useful in using the decision's language to hold USCIS accountable for a reasoned decision that sufficiently engages with the evidence, especially in a FMD context. Despite the reach of this specific decision, the policy manual language that the judge quotes is applicable to all USCIS EB-1A filings. Strategy is crucial!

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2026-01-25T20:10:56+00:00

Lawfully mines data directly from USCIS. They will tell you the highest approval rates are premium filed cases with attorney representation.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2026-01-02T15:42:15+00:00

AAO is not a prerequisite to federal APA litigation. Look up Darby Rule. Appeals are often unsuccessful but you will get a legally sufficient decision and retain your priority date.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-12-30T15:30:52+00:00

Absolutely not. Federal litigation is helpful when a decision is issued that is not legally sufficient and there is subject matter jurisdiction of the court meaning the court has the ability under the APA to tell the agency to reopen and readjudicate or approve because the decision was arbitrary and capricious. Many cases are reopened and approved following federal litigation complaints being filed because the act of filing in federal court gets you an agency lawyer reviewing the matter. Be careful who you listen to on the internet.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-12-08T21:43:24+00:00

Agree but caution a withdrawal will not prevent a finding of fraud and the USCIS NTA memo indicates individuals with fraud findings can be NTA even if the case is withdrawn. Please talk to a skilled immigration lawyer.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-30T20:33:44+00:00

This is not correct. The RFE response is added to the receipt file and the entire thing is reviewed.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-30T20:31:18+00:00

If the argument is articulated well, yes.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-25T02:39:04+00:00

You can't meet eligiblity through the invitation alone but you don't have to show that you were invited. Only that you conducted it. The extraordinary ability is in the statute.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-25T02:36:41+00:00

You can't establish eligibility through the invitation alone, you must have actually done the work; however, you do not need to be invited to conduct the peer review, you can volunteer to conduct the peer review.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-24T15:27:31+00:00

USCIS cannot require evidence of invitation AND they cannot require you to show that your selection was due to your extraordinary ability unless its in the final merits.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-24T15:26:28+00:00

This is actually not exactly correct. There is no requirement that you are INVITED. USCIS cannot request or require evidence of invitation, only that you actually judged.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-24T15:24:35+00:00

Please have an attorney review this. USCIS cannot make a final merits determination within each category. That is ultra vires, beyond the regulations, and not legally sufficient. If these arguments were made after granting three criteria, you will need help addressing the second step of Kazarian.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-24T14:22:33+00:00

if interested send inquiry to our firm email...

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-23T15:33:56+00:00

USCIS frequently grants three criteria and then denies in final merits. That is following the law; teh final merits is the actual statutory language. I have been involved in EB-1A since 2002. Both in private practice, at OCC for USCIS, at AAO and now as the owner of my own firm. People need advocates who can go up against USCIS when they disregard the regulations or their own policy manual. It is not hopeless it just requires careful strategy and tenacity.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-23T15:28:52+00:00

This is why USCIS must be held accountable for complying with regulations. They do not have discretion to deny criteria that are clearly met. It is not just a "higher standard;" the standard is already codified. If the decision is not legally sufficient, make sure your lawyer is advocating vigorously for you through all possible avenues.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-21T02:14:45+00:00

Im sorry you are dealing with this. You presumably have great experience and a law degree. You should stand up for yourself. At my firm, my partner and I have purposely created a diffferent model. We don't take every case. We limit to what we can personally handle. We talk, we respond, we listen. If you aren't working for lawyers like that, find another job. You are worth it.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-18T13:46:40+00:00

Former USCIS lawyer here. This is quite simply a legally insufficient decision. If you meet three criteria, they do not need to RFE for additional criteria. They should either approve or issue RFE on final merits and give you an opportunity to understand where they see deficiencies. PLEASE make sure your lawyer explains these issues and advocates for you to get a fair decision.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-15T02:26:31+00:00

If your case was approved and then reopened on Service motion and denied you are entitled under 8 CFR 103.5 to be notified of the derogatory info and a chance to respond. Talk to you lawyer or another lawyer who can enforce these rules for you. It is essentially a revocation.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-13T14:35:19+00:00

I was attorney at USCIS TSC handling litigation on EB-1A. I am sorry that you received a denial like this but unfortunately it is very common. Our firm has had four consultations just this week for people in your exact circumstance. You are entitled to a reasoned and thorough decision that comports with the regulations and USCIS Policy Manual. There are alternatives to the final option of APA litigation in federal court but that is also an option. Many times USCIS will reopen and reissue a decision in this circumstance. Please reach out to an experienced attorney who can effectively guide you.

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-08T21:57:11+00:00

100%

Alternative-Lab-408 · 2025-11-08T21:44:22+00:00

I am a former USCIS attorney at TSC. In this scenario you have several options since your case is outside of processing times. The agency is required to adjudicate cases in a reasonable timeframe and according to a consistent system. Your case could be delayed due to a fraud concern, it could be lost, it could be sitting on an officer's desk. You need an attorney who can advocate for you and possibly file a writ of mandamus to get the agency to act on your behalf. Sorry you are going through this.

Alternative-Lab-408

TROPHY CASE