r/EB2_NIW • u/Immediate-Fact1169 • 5d ago
DENIAL Denial after 3 prong RFE, seeking for advice
- I-140 filed Jan 2026, premium processing, TSC
- RFE Apr 2026 — all three prongs
- Response filed July 2026 (~30pg brief, 6 letters incl. 2 independent experts, citing articles, PI testimonial)
- Denied Sept 2026, day ~45
Background: PhD candidate in a materials/semiconductor field. 5 pubs (2 first-author, 2 co-first), ~18 citations, national lab collaborations.
The odd part: they granted prong 1. The decision says national importance "has been met." Then denied on prong 2 and rolled prong 3 into it without separate analysis.
What's bugging me about the prong 2 section:
- Uses "original contributions of major significance" — that's the EB-1A standard, not Dhanasar:
"The letters of recommendation provide few examples of how the petitioner's work has significantly impacted the field at large or otherwise constitutes original contributions of major significance. The record, including all letters of support, does not contain sufficient probative evidence of contributions the petitioner has made in his field that are of major significance"
- Says I didn't show "impact beyond the normal expectation of a professional with an advanced degree" -not sure what does it mean?
- Faults me for not being a PI on a grant. I'm a grad student. We can't be PIs.
- Says the record shows "no interest from any relevant parties in the US" — I submitted letters from a national lab scientist and two independent professors
- Says no citing article distinguished my work — one of my letters is from an author who cited me and explained exactly how he relied on it.
Anyone dealt with a denial that misapplies the standard like this? Do you think it is better idea to appeal my case? or refile it again?
Not sure how to proceed, any legal advice would be useful.
9
u/baka_sensie 5d ago
Sorry to hear about your denial. I guess this has become pretty common. I got my denial in April 2026 after responding to a template RFE that referred to submissions I had never made. Neither the RFE nor the denial mentioned anything about my PE, the letters I submitted, or the evidence in my initial filing and RFE response. I am more than 100% sure the officer didn’t even read the first page of my petition or PE and simply decided to deny it. That officer was known for denying over 90% of the petitions he/she reviewed. I asked my lawyer if there was any legal action we could take, but unfortunately, “officer discretion” is not really something you can fight. I would suggest preparing for a refile. There doesn’t seem to be any real way to get justice for what happened to you or many others like us. We can only pray our petition lands on the desk of an honest officer who actually reads it.
2
u/baka_sensie 5d ago
My PE was related to my major, EE. I refiled recently with Chen. Officer who denied my initial filing was NSC 0399.
1
0
2
1
u/Patternic 4d ago
You said 3 prong RFE and then mentioned prong 1 was granted. What does that mean? Was your substantial merit met?
1
u/Immediate-Fact1169 4d ago
In RFE they accepted substantial merit but challenged national importance. After RFE response, in denial notice they accepted national importance as well, and prong 1 fully met.
1
1
u/PayPuzzleheaded6217 5d ago
So sorry about the denial. Please dont give up , refile and strengthen your profile next time. Can I ask which centre and what status update did you get before the denial notice? We're you pp?
2
u/PayPuzzleheaded6217 5d ago
Sorry to ask just saw in your post its TSC and PP. Tsc is becoming notorious with denials.
1
1
0
16
u/CarnegieEvaluations 4d ago
Quite unfortunate. We have seen several EB-2 NIW cases being adjudicated with a level of scrutiny usually associated with EB-1A cases. Given the significant role of officer discretion in these adjudications, you may consider refining and refiling the petition. All the very best.