Skip to content

Case study · EB-2 NIW · RFE

EB-2 NIW RFE for an immersive cybersecurity visualization endeavor: merit accepted, national importance and positioning not

A thorough RFE on all three Dhanasar prongs. The petition argued the importance of the field, and the officer asked about the specific endeavor.

All case studies

EB-2 NIWRFE
Source
Adjudicator notice (de-identified)
Timeline
Filed June 2025, premium processing, RFE August 2025
Key lesson

Write the endeavor so an officer can see who uses it, what changes and at what scale.

Profile

Researcher and practitioner in human-centered visualization and immersive technologies for security operations, with a US master's degree, peer review, and letters of recommendation.

What was claimed

  • Prong 1: immersive visualization frameworks for cybersecurity situational awareness
  • Prong 2: education, skills, letters, peer review, and job offer
  • Prong 3: national workforce and security priorities

What happened

Prong 1: substantial merit was accepted, national importance was not. The petition included many articles and reports on AI, cybersecurity workforce and technology. The officer said the question is the specific endeavor, not the importance of the field, and reports about general topics are not probative.

The officer also said that for a STEM endeavor the record must show it advances STEM technology or research more broadly.

Prong 2: no patents, funding, grants, awards, media coverage or specific recognition of the applicant's work. The letters did not discuss specific achievements. Participation in peer review was not shown to reflect a record of success.

Prong 3 could not be assessed until the first two were established.

The RFE listed what could cure each gap: government interest in the endeavor, evidence of investment or funding, evidence the work is used by others, a plan with progress to date, and contracts or letters from potential users.

Lessons for evaluating your own case

Every notice is a list of what to fix. Use these as a checklist for your own evidence.

  • Write the endeavor so an officer can see who uses it, what changes and at what scale.
  • Replace general field statistics with evidence about this specific work: adoption, interest from users, investors or agencies, and pilots.
  • For prong 2, document achievements that others can verify: citations, patents, funding, independent letters with specifics.
  • Compare with the approved NIW letter in this library: concrete project outcomes did more work than field-level arguments.
Anonymized. Personal details, employers, receipt numbers, officer codes and law firms are removed. This is general information, not legal advice.
← EB-2 NIW RFEI-485 Procedural RFE →

See how your evidence maps to the criteria

Meritocrat's free assessment maps your evidence to EB-1A, EB-2 NIW and O-1 criteria and shows the gaps, using patterns from cases like this one.

Get your free assessment
Best practices for case evaluation