A Request for Evidence used to be the exception in a well-prepared EB-1A case. In 2026, it's close to a coin flip. If you received one recently, you're far from alone — and if you're planning to file this year, the adjudication climate you're walking into looks very different from the one that existed just a few filing seasons ago.
These figures — drawn from official USCIS statistics and practitioner tracking — aren't statistical noise. They point to a deliberate recalibration in how officers weigh extraordinary-ability claims. Understanding the mechanics behind it is the first step to filing a petition that survives it.
Four Forces Behind the RFE Surge
Filings Have Outpaced Capacity
EB-1A submissions grew by an estimated 63% between 2022 and 2024, and one recent quarter saw filings up roughly half compared to the same period a year earlier. When the inbox doubles, officers don't lower their guard — they raise it, using RFEs to force borderline cases to prove themselves rather than approving anything that feels thin.
Adjudication Was Centralized
EB-1A cases are no longer split between the Texas and Nebraska Service Centers; everything now flows through consolidated Service Center Operations. The reorganization has tightened consistency but stretched timelines — regular processing now runs close to two years.
Step Two Has Teeth Again
Under the two-step Kazarian framework, checking off three of the ten regulatory criteria only gets you in the door. The real test — the Final Merits Determination — asks whether the record as a whole proves sustained national or international acclaim. Officers are now applying that second step with genuine rigor, looking past the checklist to ask whether the petitioner truly sits at the top of the field.
No More Benefit of the Doubt
Ambiguous or borderline exhibits that once earned a favorable inference are now flagged. Officers expect each claimed criterion to stand on independently verifiable, external proof. Attorneys nationwide report the same pattern: cases that would have cleared easily in 2021–22 are now drawing detailed RFEs probing the credibility, selectivity, and real-world impact of the evidence.
The Criteria Drawing the Heaviest Fire
Original contributions of major significance
The question is no longer "what did you build?" but "who outside your organization adopted it, cited it, licensed it, or changed how they work because of it?" Achievements with strong internal impact but no external footprint are the single most common RFE target.
Leading or critical role
A senior title proves seniority, not significance. Officers now routinely challenge whether the employing organization itself is distinguished at a national or international level. A vice-president role at a company that can't document industry-wide prominence won't carry the criterion, no matter how impressive the business card.
Scholarly articles
Adjudicators have become skilled at spotting predatory journals and pay-to-publish outlets. A focused record of publications in genuinely peer-reviewed venues with real citation traction beats a long bibliography of questionable quality every time.
Judging the work of others
An invitation email is no longer enough. Officers want proof the judging actually happened — completion confirmations from organizers, reviewer records, or formal documentation of the evaluations performed.
Does an RFE Mean You're Going to Lose?
No — but it does mean your original record fell short in the officer's eyes, and the response window is your one chance to fix it. Roughly six in ten petitions that receive an RFE still end in approval when the response is handled well.
The mistake to avoid is treating the RFE as a request for more rather than better. Resubmitting thicker stacks of the same material accomplishes nothing. A winning response does three things:
- Pinpoints exactly which claims the officer doubted, in the officer's own framing.
- Answers each doubt head-on with new, stronger, independently verifiable evidence.
- Deploys credible third-party expert letters to bridge the gap between what was claimed and what the documents prove.
Filing in 2026? Build to the New Standard
The era of the technically complete but narratively thin petition is over. Before anything goes to USCIS, pressure-test your own case the way an officer will:
- Is every criterion backed by outside proof? Independent, verifiable sources — not internal memos or letters from close colleagues — should carry the weight.
- Are your contributions measured externally? Citations, adoption by other organizations, industry standards influenced, revenue or outcomes changed beyond your employer's walls.
- Does every exhibit map to a specific regulatory criterion? Evidence that doesn't clearly serve a criterion dilutes the file instead of strengthening it.
- Would the totality of the record convince a skeptic? Remember Step Two: three criteria met is the floor, not the finish line.
If any honest answer is "not sure," that's where the pre-filing work belongs — not in a scramble after an RFE arrives. The standard has moved. The petitions winning in 2026 are the ones written for where the bar is now, not where it used to be.