An RFE is not a sign of failure, but a sign

that your case wasn’t persuasive enough . Anyone preparing a NIW application will likely come across the term “RFE” (Request for Evidence) at least once. And most people start to feel anxious the moment they hear it. “Does receiving an RFE

mean my chances of approval are low?” “
Is this a request for additional materials because my application is about to be denied?” “Was my case weak from
the start?”

In fact, during consultations, I find that many people view an RFE as a negative outcome. However, with extensive experience handling NIW cases, a slightly different picture emerges. There are actually more approved cases that went through an RFE than you might think. Of course, it’s ideal to avoid an RFE altogether, but understanding the nature of the NIW program allows you to see more clearly why RFEs occur.

The key is not to view an RFE simply as a sign that “a problem has arisen,” but to identify what the adjudicator did not understand and what additional information was needed. This is because the NIW is not merely a qualification review but rather a process of persuasion.

■ NIW Is

a Process of Persuasion, Not a Checklist Review If we consider the EB-3 employment-based immigration category, its structure is relatively clear. There is an employer, a specific job position, and the applicant’s eligibility is verified through the labor certification process. While there are complex aspects, the overall framework is relatively standardized.

In contrast, NIW is different.

The adjudicator does not simply look at whether the applicant has a degree or how many years of experience they have. Instead, they ask much bigger questions:

“Is the work this person intends to do in the United States truly significant?”

“Is this person actually capable of performing that work?”

“Why should the United States offer this person the opportunity for permanent residency even at the cost of bypassing the standard labor certification process?”

These questions do not have fixed “correct” answers like multiple-choice questions. This is an area where you must persuade the adjudicator based on the evidence and reasoning provided by the applicant.

Therefore, many RFEs in NIW cases arise not because evidence is lacking, but because the evidence submitted was insufficient to fully convince the adjudicator.

■ The Most Common RFEs Stem

from “National Importance” One of the most frequently encountered RFEs in practice relates to “National Importance.”

Many applicants do an excellent job of describing their careers. They provide detailed accounts of where they worked, what projects they carried out, and what technologies they developed.

However, what the examiner is really interested in is slightly different:

“So why is this work important to the United States?”

It is precisely this point where many cases receive an RFE.

For example, simply being a semiconductor engineer does not automatically qualify as being of national importance. Nor are doctors or researchers automatically approved. Rather than focusing on whether the applicant is outstanding, the examiner seeks to verify what significance the applicant’s activities hold for U.S. industry, the economy, public health, technological competitiveness, public policy, and so on.

In fact, there are many cases where an RFE is issued even though the applicant has an excellent career history, simply because the connection to the U.S. was not sufficiently explained.

In other words, an RFE regarding “National Importance” often does not mean that the applicant’s achievements are insufficient, but rather that the explanation linking those achievements to U.S. needs was lacking.

■ “Well Positioned” Cannot

Be Explained by Work Experience Alone The second most common RFE relates to the “Well Positioned” criterion.

Many applicants misunderstand this point.

“I have 15 years of relevant experience—why are my qualifications being questioned?”
““I have a Ph.D.—why do I need to provide additional explanation?”

However, examiners are not simply looking at the length of your career.

They assess how naturally your past achievements align with the activities you plan to undertake in the United States.

For example, if you have only worked in the manufacturing sector in the past but suddenly claim national importance in a completely different field, additional explanation may be required. Conversely, even if you haven’t published many papers, your application can still be persuasive if your relevant projects, patents, industrial achievements, and experience in technology development naturally align with your future plans.

Therefore, a “Well Positioned” RFE does not mean “you lack the qualifications”; rather, it means “please explain further how those qualifications connect to your future plans.”

■ A Large Number of Letters of Recommendation Does Not

Guarantee the Elimination of an RFE Many NIW applicants tend to focus on the number of letters of recommendation. “Will eight letters

be enough?” “Would ten
be more advantageous?”

However, in the actual review process, the content of the letters is far more important than their number.

Adjudicators do not count the number of letters of recommendation. In fact, if multiple letters merely repeat the same information, their evidentiary value may not increase significantly.

In reality, there are cases where an RFE is issued even when more than 10 letters of recommendation are submitted. Conversely, there are also cases where just 4–5 letters of recommendation are sufficient to create a very compelling case.

What matters is not the number of recommenders, but how specifically they describe the applicant’s expertise, influence, and the significance of the activities to be undertaken in the United States.

Ultimately, letters of recommendation should not be a tool to increase the volume of documentation, but rather evidence that supports the applicant’s case.

■ An RFE Is Not

a Notice of Denial When people receive an RFE, many immediately think of a denial. However, from a practical standpoint, it needs to be viewed somewhat differently.

From the adjudicator’s perspective, an RFE means that the current materials are insufficient to reach a definitive conclusion.

In other words, it is a process of requesting additional explanations or evidence.

Of course, not every RFE is a positive sign. However, looking at it from the opposite perspective, the adjudicator may have issued the RFE because they determined that the additional materials were worth reviewing.

If the examiner could have reached a clear conclusion based solely on the submitted materials, they might have made a decision immediately without requesting additional information, depending on the circumstances.

Therefore, it is a more realistic approach to view an RFE not simply as a problem, but as an opportunity to strengthen your case.

■ Ultimately, the essence of an NIW RFE is

a matter of persuasiveness . When preparing an NIW application, many people first focus on quantifying factors such as academic degrees, the number of publications, citations, patents, and letters of recommendation. Of course, these are all important factors.

However, when analyzing actual RFEs, a significant number are not due to a lack of credentials.

They occur because the examiner did not fully understand the applicant’s case or because it was not explained well enough to convince the examiner of its significance.

The NIW is not a game of submitting as many documents as possible.
It is a process of constructing a single, coherent line of reasoning that naturally leads the examiner to nod in agreement.

Ultimately, the essence of the NIW is not evidence collection but persuasion.

Therefore, the most accurate explanation for an NIW RFE is not simply a lack of documentation, but rather that “the persuasion process is not yet complete.”