The petitioner has filed an I-140 EB-1A petition and received a Request for Evidence from USCIS. The RFE identifies one or more criteria the officer found unmet, raises specific evidentiary or analytical objections under the Kazarian framework, and sets a response deadline that controls the rest of the timeline.
An EB-1A Request for Evidence is USCIS asking, under 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(8), for more proof before deciding your I-140. The deadline printed on the notice controls and generally cannot be extended. The response must address each challenged criterion and any final-merits findings directly.
Short deadline?
Accepted matters can receive a complete EB-1A RFE response ready to file in as little as seven calendar days.
The procedural foundation is 8 C.F.R. § 103.2(b)(8), which governs the issuance of Requests for Evidence and Notices of Intent to Deny. The regulation gives USCIS discretion to issue an RFE where the initial filing does not establish eligibility on its face, and it gives the petitioner a fixed window to respond.
The substantive standard the RFE is operating under is 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) — the ten criteria for extraordinary ability — read against the two-part framework articulated in Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010). At Step 1, USCIS evaluates whether the record satisfies at least three criteria as a threshold matter. At Step 2, the officer conducts a final-merits analysis to determine whether the petitioner has demonstrated extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim.
RFE response windows are set by USCIS in the notice. The regulation permits USCIS to set a response period shorter than the maximum and says additional time generally may not be granted. Use the exact date printed on the notice rather than a general response window found online. The USCIS Policy Manual provides additional guidance on RFE issuance and response procedures at Volume 1, Part E.
A failure to respond by the deadline is treated as abandonment. A response that does not address the deficiencies identified in the RFE is treated as a substantive failure on the merits.
The petitioner has, or can assemble, evidence and argument addressing the specific objections the officer raised.
The standard approach. The response is built as a cover letter that frames the case, followed by a criterion-by-criterion rebuttal that quotes the officer's objection, identifies the controlling regulation and any applicable case law, and walks through the new and existing evidence. New exhibits, supplemental letters, and corrected documentation are added as needed. The response treats the RFE as a structured argument the officer wants answered point by point, not as a general invitation to refile.
The petitioner's record also supports a national interest waiver argument and they want a backup classification on file.
An EB-2 NIW petition can be filed in parallel with the EB-1A response. The two petitions are evaluated independently. We have used this approach in cases where the EB-1A record is strong but the RFE raises multiple criteria challenges, and where the petitioner wants a second pending petition under a different standard. The trade-off is the second filing fee and the duplicative drafting effort; the benefit is preserving optionality if the EB-1A is ultimately denied.
The petitioner needs a faster decision after the response is filed and meets the eligibility requirements.
Premium processing is available for EB-1A under 8 C.F.R. § 106.4. Where the RFE response is being filed on a strong record, upgrading to premium processing after submission gives the case a 15-business-day adjudication window from the date the upgrade is accepted. The fee is significant; the calculation is whether the time savings is worth it given the petitioner's status timeline.
The original record was meaningfully under-built and a refile with substantially better evidence is feasible.
Withdrawing the I-140 and refiling later is occasionally the right call where the original petition was filed prematurely and the RFE has clarified what the officer is looking for. The trade-offs are real: the filing fee is not refundable, the priority date is lost (no new priority date is established until the refile), and any concurrent I-485 application is implicated. We do not generally recommend this option where the existing record can be defended.
The RFE makes clear the EB-1A standard cannot be met on this record, but a different employment-based category fits.
In some cases the RFE clarifies that the record will not satisfy the EB-1A standard but supports an EB-2 NIW or, where an employer is willing, a labor-certification-based EB-2 or EB-3. This is a strategic pivot rather than a response. The petitioner withdraws the EB-1A and pursues the alternative classification on its own timeline.
Rare. Reserved for cases where the procedural posture or factual record is unusually complex.
USCIS does not routinely conduct interviews on I-140 adjudications and there is no statutory right to one. Where exceptional circumstances warrant, counsel can request supplementary procedural relief; this is unusual and is not part of the standard response toolkit.
Holding a notice with language you can't parse? The RFE Encyclopedia decodes what USCIS's stock phrases mean →
You'll hear back within 48 hours whenever a petition is being drafted or an RFE is on the clock. No ghosting.
Every petition is drafted from a fresh interview-extracted fact sheet. We don't recycle petitions or rec letters across unrelated clients.
We file on every criterion we can credibly defend. When a criterion is thin, we fold it into "Original Contributions of Major Significance" rather than stand it up as its own weak argument.
RFE response is a separate flat fee of $2,000 to $5,000, quoted before any work begins. Strategy consultations, whether-to-respond conversations, and post-denial planning are not billed hourly.
We use a structured SOAR (Situation, Obstacle, Action, Result) interview process to understand the client's actual work, including in technical and niche fields where the record doesn't speak for itself.
We draft reference letters from the interview and evidence review — included in the petition fee — then coordinate with recommenders for signature. We don't leave recommenders to produce their own letters.
RFEs aren't surprises. Every petition is drafted with our standing RFE response framework in mind so that if an RFE lands, we're executing a plan, not starting from scratch.
The initial call is a candid read on whether the case is defensible — not a pitch. If we think the profile doesn't support EB-1A right now, we'll tell you.
Tell us about your immigration needs and we'll be in touch to discuss how we can help.
Immigration counsel to Fortune 500 employers at a national firm · Adjudicated 12,000+ visas at the U.S. Consulate, Mexico · Working in U.S. immigration since 2008
Featured in Newsweek, Condé Nast Traveler, Daily Mail