USCIS intends to deny your EB-1A?
An EB-1A Notice of Intent to Deny means USCIS has moved beyond simply asking for more evidence. The agency has identified a basis on which it presently believes the extraordinary ability petition should be denied. The response should address each proposed finding, the evidence already in the record, and USCIS's evaluation of the beneficiary's achievements as a whole.
Send Us Your EB-1A NOIDDetermine which part of the extraordinary ability analysis USCIS rejects.
An EB-1A NOID may challenge the threshold evidence, the final merits analysis, or both.
EB-1A extraordinary ability classification does not require a permanent job offer or labor certification and permits self-petitioning. The beneficiary must nevertheless satisfy the substantive extraordinary ability standard.
Where the case does not rely on a qualifying one-time major internationally recognized award, USCIS evaluates whether the petition satisfies the required number of regulatory evidentiary criteria. USCIS then evaluates the evidence in its totality to determine whether the beneficiary has sustained national or international acclaim and belongs among the small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field.
A NOID should therefore be separated into its distinct evidentiary and overall-merits findings before additional evidence is selected.
What part of USCIS's EB-1A analysis is adverse?
The response should not use a final-merits argument to avoid an unresolved threshold criterion, or vice versa.
Does the evidence satisfy the regulatory language?
USCIS first determines whether the evidence establishes a qualifying one-time achievement or satisfies the required number of applicable regulatory criteria.
At this stage, the response should focus on the actual language of the criterion and explain why the evidence fits it.
What does the evidence show when considered together?
USCIS then evaluates the totality of the evidence to determine whether the beneficiary demonstrates the level of expertise, sustained acclaim, and recognized achievements required for extraordinary ability.
Evidence already accepted at the first stage may therefore need additional context explaining its significance at the final merits stage.
What EB-1A evidence does USCIS say is insufficient?
Prizes & Awards
A response may need to establish the award's significance, eligibility requirements, competitive scope, selection process, number of recipients, and national or international recognition.
Membership Requiring Outstanding Achievement
Document the actual membership requirements and establish whether recognized experts evaluate applicants based on outstanding achievements.
Media About the Beneficiary
USCIS may question whether articles or media are actually about the beneficiary and the beneficiary's work and whether the publication satisfies the applicable criterion.
Judging the Work of Others
Peer review, grant review, competitions, editorial activity, conference review, and similar work should be documented with evidence of what was judged and the beneficiary's actual role.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The response should distinguish originality from major significance and show objective evidence of influence, use, adoption, implementation, commercial value, citations, or other impact.
Scholarly Articles
The evidence should establish qualifying authorship and can also be used to explain influence and recognition when relevant to the overall merits analysis.
Artistic Display
For qualifying artistic cases, the response should document display of the beneficiary's work at artistic exhibitions or showcases within the meaning of the criterion.
Leading or Critical Role
USCIS may question both whether the beneficiary's role was leading or critical and whether the organization or establishment has the required distinguished reputation.
High Salary or Remuneration
Comparative compensation evidence should use a meaningful benchmark for the occupation, location, industry, seniority, or other relevant market rather than presenting salary figures without context.
USCIS may accept the evidence and still dispute what it proves overall.
The response should explain the significance of the entire record.
A final merits NOID often acknowledges publications, citations, peer review, awards, memberships, media, compensation, leadership, or other achievements while concluding that the evidence does not establish the required level of sustained acclaim and extraordinary ability.
That type of NOID requires more than resubmitting the same documents. The response should explain why the evidence, viewed cumulatively, demonstrates standing at the top of the relevant field.
Comparative evidence can be particularly useful. Appropriate benchmarks, independent evidence of adoption or influence, selectivity data, organizational reputation, citation context, commercial impact, and independent recognition can help show why the beneficiary's record is not merely successful but extraordinary.
Six questions to ask about USCIS's proposed findings.
Did USCIS Apply the Correct Criterion?
Compare the NOID's stated requirement with the actual regulatory language and current USCIS policy rather than accepting an additional requirement that does not appear in the governing standard.
Did USCIS Consider All Relevant Evidence?
Identify exhibits USCIS omitted, misstated, or addressed only partially, particularly where the same evidence supports more than one part of the extraordinary ability analysis.
Did USCIS Separate Criterion Analysis From Final Merits?
Determine whether the notice rejects evidence under a threshold criterion because USCIS believes it does not independently establish extraordinary ability as a whole.
Does USCIS Lack Context?
An achievement may appear ordinary when the record does not explain its selectivity, impact, comparative importance, or significance in the particular field.
Is USCIS Relying on an Incorrect Factual Premise?
Correct inaccurate statements about publication counts, citation numbers, award criteria, organizations, salaries, job duties, dates, authors, or other material evidence.
What Evidence Directly Answers the Proposed Denial?
Additional evidence should be selected because it resolves a specific finding, not merely because it makes the petition larger.
Use evidence that explains significance, not just existence.
Six principles for responding to an EB-1A NOID.
Answer Every Proposed Ground
Do not allow an unresolved criterion or final-merits finding to remain because another part of the case is particularly strong.
Separate the Two Stages
Explain first why evidence satisfies the criterion and separately why the total record establishes extraordinary ability.
Use Comparisons Carefully
Choose benchmarks that actually correspond to the beneficiary's field, occupation, career level, geography, or other relevant comparison group.
Prioritize Independent Evidence
Objective corroboration can strengthen a record that USCIS views as depending too heavily on employer or recommendation letters.
Correct Factual Errors Explicitly
Identify the incorrect premise, cite the evidence showing the correct fact, and explain why the correction matters to the proposed finding.
Preserve the Record
If USCIS ultimately denies the I-140, the NOID response may become central to a later appeal, motion, or refiling strategy.
A NOID response period is much shorter than many RFE response periods.
The maximum USCIS NOID response period is 30 days.
The actual notice states the deadline for the case. Evidence gathering, expert analysis, letters, comparative research, and documentary corrections should therefore begin immediately.
The response should follow the instructions on the notice and should be submitted as a complete response rather than assuming USCIS will provide another opportunity to supplement the record.
EB-1A NOID FAQs
Common questions when USCIS proposes to deny an extraordinary ability petition.