Top 10 Reasons for EB-2 NIW RFEs and How to Overcome Them

Requests for Evidence (RFEs) are issued by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to ask for clarification or additional information regarding a visa application. They can be issued for any number of reasons and are a very common issue for visa applicants and their representatives to deal with.  

Getting an RFE means having to answer it in a timely manner, and that means unexpected delays and costs. Sometimes an RFE is the result of a simple oversight while in other cases it’s a sign of a serious deficiency in the visa application.  

An RFE is an administrative hurdle that can be resolved easily, but not always. Much depends on the reason it was issued and what information USCIS is asking for.  

In this post, we’re going to look at ten common reasons why RFEs are issued along with ways to deal with each of them. To simplify matters, we’re going to look at RFEs specifically in the context of EB-2 and EB-2 NIW visa applications, which are the most common visa types where RFEs are issued.  

10 Top EB-2 RFE and Denial Reasons 

The EB-2 visa process, especially under the NIW category, is detail-oriented and can be delayed or jeopardized by RFEs and denials. RFEs typically point to gaps or ambiguities in the application, while denials indicate unmet or inadequately documented eligibility requirements. Both are often caused by avoidable issues in preparation and documentation.  

To improve the chances of success, petitioners should anticipate common USCIS concerns and address them proactively with comprehensive, credible evidence.  

EB-2 RFE and denial reasons are categorized based on the three prongs of the NIW criteria. 

Many RFE and denial decisions contain numerous reasons across several areas, with many of them being repeated. RFEs often include similar phrases and requests for applicants to submit evidence in particular areas depending on the prong, and these common requests are highlighted at the beginning of each prong group to help readers better understand the USCIS’s primary concerns. 

Denials & RFEs for Issues Covered in the 1st Prong: Substantial Merit and National Importance 

These are the top reasons for denials and RFEs issues for criteria covered under the first “prong” of EB-2 NIW eligibility:

Lack of Evidence for Significant Employment of U.S. Workers or Other Substantial Positive Economic Effects 

RFEs often arise when the petitioner fails to clearly demonstrate how the proposed endeavor will contribute to broader societal or economic goals, particularly in terms of job creation and economic impact. The USCIS requires specific evidence showing the endeavor’s potential to create employment opportunities or generate positive economic effects, particularly in the U.S. economy. In many cases, petitioners fail to provide detailed projections for future growth, job creation, or revenues, or they do not substantiate these claims with sufficient data. Additionally, petitioners may struggle to show that their proposed endeavor has national or global implications for the field, or that the economic benefits extend beyond a local or limited scope, which ultimately undermines their ability to satisfy the national importance requirement under the Dhanasar framework. 

For instance, in a recent case, the petitioner proposed to establish a business providing high-level accounting and audit consulting services for U.S. and Brazilian companies. The business plan outlined the petitioner’s intention to hire 11 full-time employees and potentially create 46 indirect jobs. However, the USCIS concluded that the petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence demonstrating that these jobs would have a substantial economic impact on the U.S. or lead to broader positive effects in the Accounting Industry. According to the USCIS, the submitted evidence did not show that the proposed endeavor would benefit the national economy or the aforementioned industry beyond the immediate business or local community. As a result, the petitioner did not meet the requirement for significant employment of U.S. workers or other substantial positive economic effects. 

In a Denial Decision, the USCIS stated that general references to business or economic improvement, job creation, and societal impact were insufficient to establish the national importance of the proposed endeavor. The record did not demonstrate that the petitioner’s work had implications beyond his prospective employer, business partners, or clients. There was no evidence showing that the endeavor would have a significant impact on the economy, the marine transport sector, the oil and gas sector, or national security at a national level. The USCIS also highlighted that the petitioner failed to demonstrate how the endeavor would employ a substantial number of workers or provide significant economic benefits to a specific region – or the country overall – through job creation, tax contributions, or business activity.  

Tips: 

• Present clear projections for job creation, revenue growth, and overall economic impact, supported by realistic assumptions, market research, and/or industry reports. 

• Show that the petitioner’s proposed endeavor has broader relevance, influencing the field or industry on a national or global scale by creating jobs, driving innovation, and/or improving industry practices. 

• To strengthen their claims, provide third-party evidence, such as expert opinions or industry analyses, to demonstrate the broader societal and economic value of the petitioner’s work. 

Missing or Vague Information on the Endeavor’s Impact on Economically Depressed Regions 

When a petitioner’s business is located in an economically depressed area, the USCIS requires clear evidence that the proposed endeavor will generate significant economic benefits for the region. This includes details on how the business will contribute to local job creation, tax revenues, and profits, as well as its broader impact on regional economic growth and stability. 

A vague or incomplete explanation of the location, such as failing to clarify the area’s economic conditions or provide supporting documentation, can weaken the case. For example, if a petitioner claims that their business will operate in an economically depressed area but provides little evidence of how it will stimulate the local economy – such as hiring plans, job creation, or financial contributions – the USCIS may determine that the endeavor does not meet the national importance requirement. 

For instance, in one case, the petitioner registered his company in Kissimmee, Florida, but failed to provide sufficient evidence showing that the area qualifies as economically depressed. The USCIS noted that the petitioner did not demonstrate how the business would have a substantial economic impact on the region, particularly through job creation or increased revenue. Despite outlining plans to hire employees, no evidence was submitted verifying employment or salary contributions to local economic growth. Additionally, there was no documentation proving that the economic conditions in Kissimmee warranted the proposed endeavor’s intervention or that it would offer substantial benefits. This lack of evidence regarding the location’s economic conditions hindered the petitioner’s ability to establish the endeavor’s national importance under the Dhanasar framework. 

In another case, the USCIS highlighted that no evidence was submitted regarding how the petitioner’s business would impact an economically depressed area or demonstrate national importance. The record did not mention whether the proposed startup entity would be located in an economically depressed area or how the area would benefit from the jobs created. 

Tips: 

• Clearly specify the business location and provide a detailed description of its economic conditions, demonstrating how the proposed endeavor will address regional challenges and contribute to the area’s development. 

• Explain how the endeavor’s benefits extend beyond the local area to impact broader state or national economic interests, as the NIW requires a national or even global level of benefit. 

• Illustrate the broader potential impact of the endeavor, such as through plans for expansion, franchising, or scaling, showing how it could generate economic growth in other regions or sectors. 

• Ensure the business plan explicitly outlines how the endeavor will uplift the region, providing measurable evidence of job creation, tax contributions, and other economic or societal benefits that demonstrate a tangible positive impact on the local economy and beyond. 

Failure to Demonstrate the Broader, Indirect Impact of the Endeavor 

The USCIS often questions whether an endeavor’s effects extend beyond the company itself, highlighting the lack of clear evidence demonstrating its contributions to the broader industry, field, or society. 

In one case, the USCIS concluded that the petitioner failed to show that his proposed endeavor would extend beyond his company and its clients to impact the Manufacturing Industry more broadly. The USCIS emphasized that the analysis should focus on the petitioner’s intended impact, rather than just the occupational classification. While the petitioner referenced a U.S. occupational shortage, this alone did not demonstrate that his work would have national importance. The RFE also noted that the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show his business would impact the regional or national population or the broader Manufacturing Industry. Additionally, while the petitioner’s business plan indicated an intention to hire 13 full-time employees, this evidence did not show that such employment would have substantial positive effects in a community the size of San Francisco. 

In another case, the USCIS highlighted a lack of evidence regarding the broader, indirect impact of the petitioner’s proposed endeavor. The RFE focused on whether the endeavor would have broad, national implications, rather than benefiting a specific employer or client. While the petitioner’s plan to establish an architecture firm was noted, the evidence did not demonstrate that the business would impact the regional or national population at a level consistent with national importance. Articles and industry reports were insufficient to show the proposed endeavor’s broader impact, and recommendation letters lacked detail on how the petitioner’s work would carry national significance. The business also failed to present broadly applicable measures that could be adopted by a range of companies, and there was no evidence of ongoing research activities to support the broader impact of the work. The USCIS determined that the petitioner did not meet the national importance requirement under the Dhanasar framework due to a lack of indirect or broader impact. 

Tips: 

• Provide concrete examples of how the endeavor will influence the industry, field, or sector at large, beyond the immediate operations of the company. This could include industry-wide advancements, trends, or shifts driven by the endeavor’s success. 

• Offer evidence of collaborations with other organizations, publications in recognized industry journals, or innovations that have the potential to be adopted beyond the company, showcasing the endeavor’s broader impact. 

• Highlight indirect benefits such as positive effects on the supply chain, the creation of new markets, employment opportunities in other sectors, advancements in technology, or improvements to societal welfare, demonstrating the endeavor’s broader value beyond direct business operations. 

Insufficient or Inconsistent Business Plan Details 

Although it is possible to secure approval without a business plan, the USCIS often requests one during the RFE process to better assess the proposed endeavor’s viability. The USCIS frequently raises concerns about business plans that lack specificity in critical areas such as personnel requirements, marketing strategies, sales projections, and implementation timelines. Plans that present unclear or unsupported financial figures, vague goals, or inconsistencies between projected and actual figures are particularly prone to receiving an RFE. To strengthen the application, the business plan must be comprehensive, well-documented, and clearly demonstrate how the proposed endeavor will be executed and sustained. 

In one case, the USCIS said that the petitioner’s business plan lacked specificity regarding how and why his startup business is in the national interest. The USCIS also concluded the petitioner failed to provide specific insights into what he intends to do as an entrepreneur and chief executive. As such, the USCIS was unable to determine whether his proposed endeavor has national importance. The USCIS also concluded that although the petitioner provided incorporation documents and a business plan, it remained unclear as to what the petitioner’s endeavor involved as he did not provide a statement. 

In its Denial Decision, the USCIS underlined the business plan submitted in response to the RFE, which indicates a significant discrepancy between the original and updated hiring projections. Initially, the plan projected the hiring of four teachers and four teaching assistants by year five, but the revised plan states the petitioner would hire 186 teachers and teaching assistants within the same timeframe. The USCIS emphasized that it is the petitioner’s responsibility to resolve inconsistencies in the evidence with objective documentation. Since the new plan is materially different from the original filing, the USCIS determined it would not be considered. Therefore, the USCIS concluded that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the proposed endeavor would create substantial economic benefits or job creation at a national level, as required by the Dhanasar framework. 

In one RFE, the USCIS noted that the petitioner’s business plan included staffing and revenue projections but lacked sufficient details or explanations regarding their basis or how they would be realized. The plan made various projections about hiring and revenue, yet did not provide the necessary supporting evidence or clarifications to make these projections probative. Without such details, the business plan failed to demonstrate how the proposed endeavor would have broad, national implications or rise to the level of national importance required for the EB-2 NIW. The USCIS emphasized that more specific information is needed to substantiate the claims made in the plan. 

Tips: 

• Provide a comprehensive, well-researched business plan that clearly outlines the scope of the endeavor and its objectives. 

• Include detailed sales strategies and assumptions that demonstrate a clear understanding of the market and how the business intends to capture and grow its customer base. 

• Present growth projections for revenue and hiring that are supported by credible industry research and realistic assumptions. 

• Detail specific job roles to be created, the number of positions, as well as provide a rationale for why each position is necessary for the success of the business. 

• Clearly explain how projections will be achieved, outlining a step-by-step action plan for scaling the business and reaching projected goals. 

• Incorporate multiplier effects where applicable, demonstrating how the proposed endeavor will create indirect jobs or stimulate broader economic benefits, such as local supply chain effects or increased tax revenues. 

• Expand on marketing and sales strategies, ensuring these strategies are actionable, realistic, and aligned with business objectives, and provide evidence of how they will support growth and sustainability. 

Denials & RFEs for Issues Covered in the 2nd Prong: The Petitioner is Well-Positioned to Advance the Proposed Endeavor 

These are the top reasons for denials and RFEs issues for criteria covered under the second “prong” of EB-2 NIW eligibility:

Issues with Reference Letters 

The USCIS often raises issues with reference letters submitted in EB-2 NIW petitions when they lack specificity or fail to provide compelling evidence that the petitioner is well-positioned to advance their proposed endeavor. Common deficiencies include a failure to detail how the petitioner’s work has advanced the field, impacted methodologies, or introduced significant innovations; the absence of specific examples showing that the petitioner’s work has gained recognition or interest within the field; insufficient evidence that the petitioner’s achievements have been acknowledged by peers, government entities, or professional organizations; and generalized descriptions of accomplishments without demonstrating their relevance or significance to the industry.  

For example, in one RFE, the USCIS concluded that the provided letters described the petitioner’s involvement in logistics and supply chain projects but did not adequately demonstrate how these experiences translated into the ability to address a national interest issue in the U.S. The letters referenced general accomplishments, such as improved delivery times and business sustainability, but lacked detailed evidence of measurable outcomes, broader impact, or national significance. The USCIS emphasized that competent execution of past job duties does not inherently establish eligibility. 

Additionally, the USCIS noted that while expert letters may provide valuable context, they are not conclusive evidence and must be supported by independent documentation. In the referenced case, the letters failed to discuss the petitioner’s specific achievements, recognition, or broader implications beyond localized work. To avoid RFEs, letters must explicitly connect the petitioner’s unique skills and contributions to their proposed endeavor, provide measurable results, and demonstrate how these efforts align with national interest criteria. 

In another RFE, the USCIS indicated that letters provide details about the petitioner’s knowledge and abilities in the accounting field, but fail to provide specific examples of how the petitioner’s findings influence the field or industry beyond adding to the general pool of knowledge. 

Tips: 

• Highlight the petitioner’s specific achievements in letters. Reference letters must provide clear examples of how the petitioner’s work has contributed to advancements in the field, such as innovations, methodologies, or widely adopted strategies. Supporting documentation, such as contracts, patents, or evidence of implementation by others, enhances credibility. 

• Demonstrate broader significance. Emphasize how the petitioner’s contributions address national or industry-wide issues, such as economic growth, job creation, or advancements in critical areas. Avoid focusing solely on localized achievements unless they clearly demonstrate a broader impact. 

• Incorporate objective endorsements. Include endorsements from credible experts, industry leaders, or organizations that highlight the petitioner’s unique skills and contributions. Ensure these endorsements are specific and supported by independent documentation to substantiate the petitioner’s ability to advance their proposed endeavor. 

Lack of Progress Toward Achieving the Proposed Endeavor 

The USCIS may raise concerns about whether the petitioner has demonstrated tangible progress in advancing their proposed endeavor. These concerns often arise when the record lacks evidence of meaningful steps or preparations that indicate the petitioner’s readiness to implement their plan. Common issues include: 

• Insufficient information about existing or potential clients, contracts, or professional engagements that support the viability of the endeavor. 

• Absence of letters of intent, memorandums of understanding, or other documentation showing a commitment to collaboration or partnership with U.S.-based entities. 

• Lack of evidence that the petitioner has taken a critical or leading role in their field or within the proposed endeavor, such as establishing or operating a similar business, securing funding, or obtaining endorsements from industry experts. 

For example, in a recent RFE, the USCIS emphasized that while a petitioner is not required to have chosen a company name or registered the company to do business in a specific location to establish sufficient progress toward achieving a proposed endeavor, doing so can be a favorable factor in determining whether the petitioner is well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor. The record does not indicate that the petitioner is prepared to open or operate a business in the U.S. Furthermore, there is no documentation in the record showing that the petitioner has ever owned, established, or successfully operated a business similar to the proposed endeavor. 

In one case, the USCIS noted that the record did not appear to include any contracts from interested U.S. customers or clients to employ the petitioner or request their expertise or services, which would indicate that they are well-positioned to advance the proposed endeavor. Similarly, in another example, the USCIS concluded that the petitioner’s inability to demonstrate interest from potential clients, investors, or partners highlights a lack of progress toward the proposed endeavor. 

In another RFE, the USCIS stated that the letter of interest in establishing a partnership lacked specifics regarding projects, financial commitments, or other pertinent details. Additionally, the recently awarded contract for more than $200,000 appeared to have been granted to the petitioner’s company in Brazil, which does not demonstrate an interest in or progress toward the petitioner’s proposed endeavor in the U.S. 

In one RFE, the USCIS noted that the petitioner claimed they worked as a legal advisor, lawyer, and consultant for large companies, multinationals, quasi-governmental entities, and civil society organizations. However, the petitioner failed to provide evidence of the professional services rendered to these companies, the income generated from those services, or documentation of contracts or prospective clients seeking their professional services. 

Tips: 

• Provide clear evidence such as documentation of grants, including amounts and terms.  

• Submit copies of contracts, agreements, or letters of intent that show relationships with clients or partners relevant to the endeavor.  

• Offer proof of prior achievements, such as successful projects or innovations, with measurable outcomes that demonstrate a track record of success.  

• Show evidence of holding a critical or leadership role in the field, such as establishing or operating a similar business or securing key partnerships. 

Lack of Information About the Investment/Funding Sources 

The USCIS frequently requests details about funding sources and partnerships to evaluate the feasibility of the proposed endeavor. Common concerns include insufficient evidence of financial backing, lack of interested partners, or vague descriptions of financial resources. 

In one RFE, the USCIS highlighted that the record did not appear to include documentary evidence of the investment funding required to start the business. 

In another example, the USCIS noted that the petitioner had not submitted evidence to establish they have the means for funding, a job offer from a U.S. employer, interested U.S.-based customers or investors, or other documentation reflecting feasible plans for financial support in the U.S. 

In one case, the USCIS raised concerns about a lack of evidence regarding the financial support and funding for the petitioner’s proposed endeavor. The petitioner failed to provide any documentation showing financial backing, such as contracts, job offers, or investments from U.S. organizations. Additionally, there was no evidence of plans to secure funding through venture capital firms, angel investors, or startup accelerators, nor was there any indication of how the petitioner would afford the endeavor, including living expenses. The USCIS emphasized that unsupported assertions without substantive evidence are insufficient for approval.  

Tips: 

• Provide clear evidence of financial support or interest from investors, partners, or relevant entities. This can include: 

• Letters of interest or intent from U.S. government entities or private organizations. 

• Documentation of funding from U.S.-based investors, such as venture capital firms, angel investors, or startup accelerators. 

• Evidence of grants, awards, or non-monetary support from government sources at the federal, state, or local level. 

• Contracts showing products, projects, or services being utilized by companies. 

• Patents, licensed technology, or advancements adopted by others in the field. 

• Financial documents like bank statements or property assessments to verify available funds. 

• Include evidence of both direct and indirect progress toward achieving the proposed goals, such as market interest, technological adoption, or societal benefits. 

• Substantiate the financial viability of the endeavor with clear proof of investment or funding. 

Denials & RFEs for Issues Covered in the 3rd Prong: Waiving the Job Offer & Labor Certification Requirements 

These are the top reasons for denials and RFEs issues for criteria covered under the second “prong” of EB-2 NIW eligibility:

Urgency of the National Interest in the Petitioner’s Contributions 

For a National Interest Waiver to be granted, it is essential that the petitioner demonstrates that the national interest in their proposed work is urgent and pressing. The labor certification process exists to ensure that the hiring of foreign workers does not adversely affect U.S. workers, and to bypass this process; there must be clear evidence that the petitioner’s work is time-sensitive or critical in a way that necessitates immediate attention. 

In this case, the petitioner has not effectively demonstrated the urgency of their contributions. The claim that the proposed work will benefit the United States is not supported by evidence showing that the work is time-sensitive or that delays in the work would have significant negative consequences for the U.S. For example, the petitioner could present evidence of a national need or a crisis situation that requires their skills urgently, or they could demonstrate that their contributions will play a critical role in addressing ongoing issues that cannot wait for the labor certification process to be completed. A lack of such evidence weakens the argument for bypassing the labor certification process and suggests that the national interest in the petitioner’s contributions may not be sufficiently pressing. Without establishing this urgency, the request for a waiver remains insufficient. 

Tips: 

• Emphasize the urgency of the petitioner’s work if it involves time-sensitive research or efforts in a field of national interest. Identifying vulnerabilities, challenges, or gaps within the industry or field can further clarify the importance of the petitioner’s endeavor. 

• Highlight the industry’s reliance on innovation and the role of high-level professionals in addressing critical gaps to strengthen the case. Additionally, demonstrating how the endeavor facilitates knowledge transfer within the field is highly valuable. 

• Provide evidence of how the petitioner’s work will lead to tangible, immediate benefits for the U.S., such as solving critical problems, addressing urgent needs, or advancing national priorities that cannot be delayed. 

Benefit to the United States, Even with Other Qualified U.S. Workers Available 

The NIW is intended to provide a pathway for individuals whose work benefits the U.S. even in the presence of qualified U.S. workers who can perform the same tasks. However, the petitioner has not sufficiently demonstrated how their contributions would provide such benefits. To satisfy this condition, the petitioner needs to show that their proposed work offers exceptional advantages to the U.S. economy, society, or national interests – advantages that would outweigh the standard process of labor certification. 

In its decisions, the USCIS often highlights that the petitioner must go beyond general claims of benefit and provide clear, substantive evidence that the proposed work will result in significant, measurable contributions to U.S. national interests, such as advancing economic development, promoting technological innovation, or addressing important societal needs.  

It is not enough to state that the work will be beneficial; the petitioner must substantiate these claims with data, studies, or other forms of documentation that directly link the proposed work to tangible outcomes for the U.S. economy or society. Without such evidence, the claim that the petitioner’s contributions are of exceptional value remains speculative and insufficient to bypass the labor certification process. 

Tips: 

• Include detailed, realistic job creation projections in the business plan, along with employment multipliers for indirect job creation, to showcase the broader economic impact. Ensure financial data and hiring projections are thoroughly explained and supported by credible sources. 

• Provide quantitative data or research that demonstrates the potential impact of the petitioner’s work on U.S. industries or sectors, such as job creation, economic growth, or technological advancements. 

• Submit expert opinions or endorsements from professionals in the field who can attest to the petitioner’s exceptional qualifications and the national significance of their work. 

• Identify specific U.S. challenges or needs that the petitioner’s work addresses, explaining how their contributions will provide solutions or improvements beyond what other qualified workers can offer. 

The Impracticality of Securing a Job Offer or Obtaining Labor Certification 

In the case of an individual seeking an NIW, the petitioner must demonstrate that it would be impractical for them to secure a traditional job offer or undergo the labor certification process. While the petitioner in this instance proposes an entrepreneurial endeavor that may result in self-employment, this alone is insufficient to meet the requirement. The fact that the petitioner intends to work independently does not inherently negate the need for the labor certification process. 

The petitioner must present specific, tangible evidence showing why the nature of the proposed work makes it difficult to secure a job offer or obtain a labor certification. For example, they may need to demonstrate that the proposed work requires skills or expertise that are highly specialized or unique, making it unlikely that a U.S. employer could find qualified U.S. workers to fill the position. Additionally, the petitioner must explain how their qualifications, experience, or the entrepreneurial nature of the business create conditions where a traditional labor certification process is not feasible or appropriate. Without such detailed evidence, the argument that the labor certification process would be impractical remains unsubstantiated. 

While being self-employed might make labor certification impractical, this alone does not justify waiving the requirement. The petitioner must show that the benefits of their endeavor outweigh the need for labor certification or that it is unnecessary under the circumstances. The petitioner’s expertise should not be commonly found in the U.S., while focusing on specific activities that directly address a national or regional need with potential national impact. The petitioner should be positioned at the top of their field, demonstrating above-average qualifications and the potential to contribute in a way that benefits the United States. 

Tips: 

• Provide detailed explanations of the petitioner’s specialized skills or unique expertise, emphasizing how these qualifications are not readily available among U.S. workers and why they cannot be easily substituted. 

• Clearly outline how the petitioner’s entrepreneurial endeavor addresses a specific national or regional need, demonstrating the significant impact of their work on U.S. industries or societal issues. 

• Include any relevant industry-specific data or expert opinions that highlight the scarcity of professionals with the same level of expertise and how the petitioner’s contributions are critical to meeting U.S. needs. 

RFE/Denial Response 

When a petitioner receives an RFE or denial for the EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW), it is essential to address the concerns raised by the USCIS by providing comprehensive, evidence-based support. This response should focus on demonstrating the urgency and national significance of the petitioner’s work, showing how their contributions will address pressing U.S. needs and benefit key industries, the economy, and society at large. 

• Clarify National Impact: Clearly articulate how the petitioner’s work directly benefits the U.S. economy and society. For example, if the project will revitalize economically distressed areas, provide evidence that illustrates job creation, increased tax revenues, and broader economic development. 

• Demonstrate Industry-Wide Impact: Highlight how the petitioner’s work extends beyond the company itself by contributing to workforce development, innovation, and the support of small businesses. This approach underscores the broader economic benefits and long-term growth that the endeavor will foster. 

• Provide Concrete Data: Submit reliable data on job creation, revenue projections, and broader economic impact. Support these projections with credible third-party research, expert opinions, or industry reports that validate the expected outcomes. 

• Revise Business Plan: Ensure the business plan is comprehensive and updated to clarify any inconsistencies or gaps identified in the original submission. While some core elements of the plan, such as projected revenue or the petitioner’s primary business goals, should remain unchanged, it is essential to provide clearer, more detailed explanations for any areas that were questioned by the USCIS. For instance, if the projected number of new employees was revised in the RFE response, it could lead to denial in some cases. Therefore, any modifications should be justified with strong evidence, ensuring the petitioner’s work remains aligned with the original business intent while providing clearer support for projected growth and its tangible economic and societal benefits. 

• Strengthen Reference Letters: Enhance reference letters by emphasizing specific achievements, such as innovations or methodologies developed by the petitioner. The letters should also clearly demonstrate how the petitioner’s contributions address pressing national or industry-wide challenges, supported by endorsements from trusted experts or organizations. 

• Provide Evidence of Progress: Present tangible evidence of the petitioner’s progress, such as contracts, letters of intent, or partnerships with U.S.-based entities. This strengthens the case by demonstrating the petitioner’s active role in advancing the project. 

• Show Financial Readiness: Provide detailed evidence of financial backing, including investment offers, grants, or partnerships with U.S.-based entities. Include supporting documents such as bank statements and contracts to demonstrate the financial feasibility of the endeavor. 

• Highlight Relevant Achievements: Present documented proof of the petitioner’s achievements, such as patents, successful projects, or industry recognition. This evidence should be bolstered by contracts, publications, or measurable outcomes that underscore the petitioner’s impact in their field. 

• Demonstrate Urgency of Contributions: Make the case for the urgency of the petitioner’s expertise by demonstrating how their work addresses immediate, national issues. For instance, if the petitioner’s endeavor will create jobs in regions with high unemployment, this can emphasize the direct impact that their work will have on improving economic conditions. 

• Align with Federal and State Initiatives: Research relevant federal and state priorities that align with the petitioner’s work, such as recent legislation or executive orders. Demonstrating how the petitioner’s contributions support these national and local initiatives will reinforce the national importance of the project. 

• Substantiate the Benefit to the U.S.: Provide specific, quantifiable data showing how the petitioner’s contributions will benefit the U.S., whether through job creation, technological advancements, or improvements to key sectors. 

• Demonstrate Impracticality of Labor Certification: Clarify why the petitioner’s expertise is unique and irreplaceable by U.S. workers, emphasizing the specialized skills required to address a critical national need. Explain why labor certification is impractical, especially in cases where the proposed work addresses urgent public health, national security, or economic recovery challenges. 

By addressing these points with clear, data-driven evidence, the petitioner can effectively respond to an RFE or denial, demonstrating that their work is of national importance and meets the criteria for the EB-2 NIW. This approach reaffirms their contributions to the U.S. and underscores their unique qualifications. 

Success Story 

Here’s an example of how one petitioner successfully handled a Request for Evidence in a comprehensive way that moved the case forward and resulted in a successful outcome. 

A petitioner initially submitted his professional business plan to the USCIS as part of his EB-2 NIW application. This plan outlined his proposed endeavor to develop customized software solutions for Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) in the U.S. His goal was to improve the operational efficiency, security, regulatory compliance, and data analysis capabilities of CDFIs, particularly those serving underserved communities. With his expertise in software engineering and financial technology, he aimed to support the modernization of legacy systems and drive digital transformation, enabling CDFIs to better fulfill their mission of promoting economic development and financial inclusion. The petitioner also stated his objective to strengthen the U.S. financial sector and expand access to capital for underserved communities. 

Subsequently, the USCIS issued a Request for Evidence, seeking additional information to support the Petitioner’s case. Specifically, the USCIS requested proof that the petitioner holds an advanced degree or its equivalent, including a translated version of his diploma and academic transcript. For the first prong, the USCIS sought further documentation to demonstrate that the petitioner’s proposed endeavor has national importance, focusing on its potential economic impact, job creation, and benefits to economically distressed areas. Regarding the third prong, the USCIS required evidence to justify the waiver of the job offer and labor certification requirements, showing that such a waiver would benefit the U.S. economy, and that the petitioner’s work could lead to job creation or self-employment without negatively impacting U.S. workers. 

To address the issues raised by the USCIS, the petitioner enlisted Joorney to draft a comprehensive RFE response. Our team crafted the supporting document, addressing all of the USCIS’s concerns and providing additional documentation and clarifications. The focus was on substantiating the national importance of the petitioner’s proposed endeavor and reinforcing his qualifications. We emphasized his strong academic background in network engineering and software development, as well as his significant contributions to financial technology. The response detailed how his proposed work aligns with U.S. national interests, particularly in areas such as financial inclusion, economic development in distressed communities, agricultural sustainability, and financial sector innovation. Additionally, we provided compelling evidence to demonstrate how waiving the job offer and labor certification requirements would benefit the U.S. through job creation, economic growth, and the transfer of specialized skills to the domestic workforce. 

By effectively addressing the USCIS’s requests, our response strengthened the petitioner’s case and significantly enhanced his chances of approval of his EB-2 NIW visa. The additional documentation and clarifications provided a clearer picture of the national impact of his endeavor and showcased how the petitioner’s work will contribute to both the U.S. economy and its financial sector. 

Joorney Can Help You Answer Requests for Evidence 

RFEs are a frequent issue for EB-2 applicants and answering them properly is key to keeping your application on track and moving forward. This requires an understanding of the underlying issue and how to provide a satisfactory answer for USCIS.  

That’s why Joorney offers RFE response support. We will answer your RFE in a professional and timely manner that helps to resolve the issue and provides immigration authorities with the information they need to proceed. Don’t let a misunderstanding of what USCIS is asking for or an incomplete response potentially ruin your chances of success – learn more about how we can help.  

Joorney Webinars 

If you’re looking for more information on the topic of RFEs, take a look at two webinars hosted by Joorney on the topic: 

• If You Don’t See RFEs, Then You’re Not Doing EB2 NIWs
• EB2 NIW RFEs & NOIDs: Tips, Tricks & How NOT to catch it on the RFE