How an Expert Opinion Letter can help avoid an RFE on Extraordinary Ability cases

Even the most impressive, highly qualified applicants can receive RFEs on their Extraordinary Ability visa cases. This doesn’t mean they lack achievement, but the evidence package may not explain or verify candidates’ accomplishments in ways immigration officers expect.

The good news? Many RFEs stem from predictable issues that a well-crafted expert opinion letter can address. Some of these common RFE triggers include:

Achievements that don’t appear extraordinary

Applicants list impressive accomplishments, but without proper context, USCIS may view evidence as commonplace for someone in their field. Adjudicators need to see how the work stands out and why it’s rare, influential, or groundbreaking.

Indication of international acclaim and reputation, as a result of the candidate’s accomplishments in their field, aids in reaching a successful determination by USCIS, especially as it pertains to meeting the Final Merits hurdle.

Accomplishments that are novel and original may not be successful in meeting the goal of showcasing the candidate’s international acclaim and reputation if their achievements seem to operate in a silo or have not greatly impacted the field at large, which usually results from accomplishments that merely aid the candidate’s employer.

Weak or generic recommendation letters

One of the most common triggers for RFEs is recommendation letters that sound templated or vague. Praise that lacks a sense of objective authority or indicates a level of personal bias gives the sense that certain recommendation letters are from personal acquaintances rather than professional colleagues. USCIS discounts this kind of praise and wants to see objective, authoritative evaluations.

Having recommendation letters from other expert peers in the candidate’s field is the most impactful. This is especially so when these letters specifically name achievements and then go into detail on the originality and usefulness of the achievements.

Recommendation letters that focus on the advancements and achievements of the company the candidate works for do not usually bode well. In other words, having recommendation letters that focus on what the candidate did to advance a company, instead of the field at large, can trigger an RFE.

Lack of proof of impact

USCIS expects a candidate’s indicated value to go beyond participation or surface-level recognition to demonstrate a substantial, palpable impact on the candidate’s respective field. For example, officers look for whether other professionals in the field have adopted, cited, or built upon the candidate’s work.

A citations argument is usually helpful here. This means that the candidate’s citations found on their Google Scholar page can build an argument that their work has been cited and built upon. In fact, the citations found on Google Scholar can indicate where their peers are from on an international scale, demonstrating who and where their work has made an impact.

Unfortunately, when it comes to patents, they are not always well received by USCIS. A typical argument by USCIS in reference to patents has been in regard to the lack of information it provides as it pertains to who is building upon this invention or who has cited it. Thankfully, Google Patents can help find this information out, but this usually just works for U.S. patents. When it comes to patents from overseas, it may be harder to trace citations down.

Misconceptions about the published material criteria

The applicant’s own research papers, conference papers, blog posts, etc. do not meet the published material criteria. Published material falls under what other professionals have written about the candidate’s work and accomplishments, not what the candidate themselves has published.

An article from a reputable source within the candidate’s field that explicitly names the candidate and his accomplishments within his/her specific field would meet this criterion. For instance, if the candidate is an expert in AI, having an article on their work in AI, specifically naming them and their accomplishments in “AI Magazine” would stand as credible and strong evidence.

An article from a reputable source that merely speaks of the accomplishments of a whole organization but does not name the candidate explicitly may fall flat. Such a disconnect leaves USCIS open to argue that there is no proof that the candidate was a part of this accomplishment.

A well-crafted expert opinion letter can be the key to overcoming the most common RFE triggers in extraordinary ability visa cases. Want to request a sample? Reach out to our team today at [email protected]