Success Stories: NIW Case Approved Following the Appeal of a Denial Decision by TSC Officer XM2532

Case Summary:

At North America Immigration Law Group (NAILG), we are dedicated to providing comprehensive legal representation to researchers, professionals, and innovators pursuing U.S. permanent residency through the EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW) program. The case of our client, a postdoc, showcases the challenges of overcoming a denial and successfully reversing it through an appeal before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO).

Initial Filing and Challenges:

Our client’s EB-2 NIW petition was originally filed on November 20, 2023, under INA § 203(b)(2) as a professional holding an advanced degree, seeking a National Interest Waiver of the job offer requirement. The petition presented compelling arguments under the Matter of Dhanasar framework, outlining the substantial merit and national importance of the client’s proposed endeavor, the client’s strong position to advance it, and the benefit of waiving the labor certification requirement.

The client’s research focused on integrating deep learning and numerical modeling to address coastal hazards, offering practical tools for disaster mitigation, flood resilience, and urban safety. His work had already garnered support from agencies such as the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the U.S. Coastal Research Program.

However, on March 22, 2024, USCIS issued a Request for Evidence (RFE) signed by Officer XM2532, challenging all three prongs of the NIW test. We responded with a detailed and robust packet of documentation, including a personal statement from the client, additional recommendation letters, updated citation data, and evidence of federal interest in his work.

Despite this, a denial was issued on August 6, 2024, again by Officer XM2532. The denial argued that our client’s proposed endeavor lacked national importance, wrongly equated his employment duties with his broader research goals, and failed to consider extensive evidence already submitted.

Strategic Appeal Filing:

Refusing to allow an unfair assessment to halt the client’s progress, NAILG filed a formal appeal (Form I-290B) to the AAO on August 26, 2024, challenging the reasoning behind the denial.

The appeal carefully dissected the original decision and identified key adjudicative errors:

● Conflation of Employment and Endeavor: The officer improperly assessed the national importance based on the client’s employer-specific duties rather than the wider scope of his proposed research endeavor.

● Disregard of Evidence: The officer failed to address or acknowledge critical documentation, including independent expert letters, citation metrics, and federal funding support.

● Misapplication of Economic Benefit Standards: The denial implied that economic benefit was a requirement for establishing national importance, contrary to Dhanasar standards.

● Neglect of USCIS STEM Guidance: The officer ignored clear USCIS Policy Manual guidance recognizing the national importance of advanced STEM work in critical technologies like AI and deep learning.

In addition to refuting these errors, the appeal reaffirmed the client’s qualifications, research impact, and the urgency of the national interest in his work related to coastal risk mitigation and infrastructure protection.

Outcome and Reconsideration:

Following review, the AAO returned the case to the original service center for reconsideration on April 4, 2025, effectively vacating the initial denial. This procedural victory closed the appeal and reopened the path toward approval. While the AAO’s action does not by itself constitute an approval, it confirms that the original denial was flawed and requires correction. Thus, finally, after waiting for so long, the client got his I-140 NIW approval on July 9, 2025.

NAILG continues to support the client through this final stage of adjudication.

This case illustrates both the potential roadblocks in the NIW process and the critical value of strategic legal advocacy. Even in the face of a detailed denial, NAILG’s appeal laid bare the procedural and substantive flaws in the officer’s decision, ultimately resulting in the case being approved. We are proud to stand behind clients like this one, whose work in STEM fields offers tangible benefits to the national interest, and we will continue our commitment to ensuring fairness and success in U.S. immigration proceedings.

Our Firm’s Approach After a Denial:

With the USCIS NIW approval rate dropping to 62.78% in the first quarter of FY2025  (see here), denials are becoming more common—even for otherwise strong cases. That’s why it’s essential to understand how your attorney can support you strategically and proactively after a denial. At our firm, we don’t view a denial as the end of the case. We carefully analyze the officer’s reasoning and advise most clients to pursue both a refile and an appeal when appropriate.

Although appeal approvals are rare—of the nearly 1,400 AAO NIW appeals filed in FY2024, only 15 were sustained and 90 remanded (see here)—an appeal offers a key benefit: it preserves your original priority date. This can be critical if your appeal is sustained, as it may allow you to file your I-485 adjustment of status sooner, without waiting for a new priority date to become current.

Because we believe in the strength of our cases, for clients under our Approval or Refund® service, we pay the USCIS filing fee for either the appeal or the refile. We are committed to standing by your case and giving it every possible opportunity to succeed.