What are the current EB1A approval rates?

EB1A approval rates vary by service center and occupational category. USCIS data and immigration bar experience suggest overall approval rates of 40–60% for initial filings, with RFE issuance on roughly 40–60% of cases. The EB1A petition statistics report covers current rates by field and service center.

What does the Kazarian standard require?

Kazarian v. USCIS (596 F.3d 1115, 9th Cir. 2010) requires a two-step analysis: (1) whether submitted evidence meets each criterion on its plain terms, then (2) a final merits determination on the totality showing sustained national or international acclaim. USCIS codified this in Policy Memo PM-602-0005.1.

What is the difference between EB1A and O-1A for USCIS adjudication purposes?

EB1A is a permanent residence category under INA 203(b)(1)(A); O-1A is a nonimmigrant visa under INA 101(a)(15)(O). Both use the same criteria framework under 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3) and 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii) respectively, but EB1A adjudication is generally held to a higher standard, and the O-1A does not require a final merits determination.

What are the most common EB1A RFE grounds in 2024–2025?

Based on AAO non-precedent decisions from 2024–2025, the most frequent RFE grounds are: (1) Criterion 5 major significance — evidence of adoption metrics without named organizational adoption or independent expert documentation; (2) Criterion 8 organizational distinction — insufficient documentation that the employer is a distinguished organization; (3) Step 2 final merits — the petition satisfied 3 criteria but the evidence did not show sustained national acclaim in the aggregate. The AAO EB1A decisions article covers specific patterns and prevention strategies.

How has USCIS adjudication of EB1A changed in recent years?

Notable shifts from 2023–2025: (1) field-specificity tightening — USCIS increasingly requires that evidence establish extraordinary ability in the alien's specific field of endeavor, not in a broader category; (2) Criterion 6 increased scrutiny — co-authorship position is examined more carefully, and volume of publications receives less weight than venue quality; (3) Criterion 5 named adoption requirements — download statistics and citation counts without named adopting organizations are increasingly challenged.

What is USCIS Policy Memo PM-602-0005.1 and why does it matter?

PM-602-0005.1, issued March 2010, codified the Kazarian two-step framework into USCIS policy. It instructs adjudicators to evaluate each criterion on its plain terms in Step 1, then conduct a separate final merits determination in Step 2. The memo was significant because it prohibited USCIS from conflating the two steps — a practice the 9th Circuit found improper in Kazarian itself.

How should attorneys track USCIS adjudication trends for EB1A cases?

The best sources for current adjudication trends: (1) AAO non-precedent decisions — published on the USCIS website, they document specific evidence arguments that succeeded and failed in recent adjudications; (2) AILA immigration practice data and advisories; (3) USCIS processing data and reports; and (4) Immigration Copilot's AAO EB1A decisions analysis, which synthesizes patterns from 2024–2025 decisions for practitioners.

Immigration Policy

Immigration Policy & USCIS Updates: Resource Hub

USCIS EB1A and O-1 adjudication trends, policy memo analysis, approval rate data, and AAO decision summaries for immigration attorneys.

April 19, 2026·Updated May 6, 2026·7 min read

USCIS adjudication of extraordinary ability petitions evolves continuously. Policy memos are updated, AAO decisions establish new evidence patterns, and adjudicator standards shift across service centers. For EB1A and O-1 practitioners, staying current on adjudication trends is not optional — an evidence strategy that worked reliably two years ago may now receive an RFE on the same facts. This hub organizes the policy and legal framework resources, AAO decision analysis, and adjudication trend data that practitioners need to stay ahead of the current adjudication environment.

2010

Year Kazarian v. USCIS established the two-step extraordinary ability framework

596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010) held that USCIS must evaluate criteria evidence first, then make a separate final merits determination. The 9th Circuit found that USCIS had improperly demanded 'extensive documentation' at Step 1 — a task that belongs at Step 2. USCIS Policy Memo PM-602-0005.1 codified the framework nationally.

40–60%

EB1A initial filing approval rate — variable by field and evidence quality

USCIS does not publish criterion-level approval rates, but AAO decision analysis and bar experience suggest 40–60% of initial filings are approved without RFE. Well-prepared petitions with strong Step 2 arguments and properly documented evidence significantly outperform this average.

Criterion 5

The most frequently RFE'd and denied EB1A criterion — major significance is the standard

Criterion 5 (original contributions of major significance) generates more RFEs than any other criterion because 'major significance' is a high and contested standard. USCIS requires evidence that the contribution mattered to the field broadly — not just to the petitioner's employer — which requires named adoption evidence and independent expert support.

The Policy Landscape for EB1A Practitioners

Three distinct layers of legal authority govern how USCIS adjudicates extraordinary ability petitions, and understanding all three is essential for building arguments that hold:

The statute and regulations. EB1A is authorized under INA 203(b)(1)(A), which defines "aliens with extraordinary ability" as those at the "very top of their field." The implementing regulations at 8 CFR 204.5(h) define the 10 criteria, the evidentiary standards, and the self-petition mechanism. These are the floor — the minimum requirements that must be met.

USCIS Policy Manual and Policy Memos. The USCIS Policy Manual Volume 6, Part F gives adjudicators interpretive guidance on how to apply the regulatory standards. Policy Memo PM-602-0005.1 codified the Kazarian two-step framework. These policy documents have significant practical weight — they are what adjudicators actually follow when evaluating petitions, and they are frequently cited in RFEs.

AAO non-precedent decisions. The Administrative Appeals Office issues hundreds of non-precedent decisions each year on EB1A petitions. These decisions are not binding as precedent, but they reveal how USCIS is applying the policy standards to specific evidence patterns. When the AAO consistently approves petitions with a certain type of expert letter language, or consistently denies petitions with download metrics as the primary Criterion 5 evidence, that pattern is effectively the working standard — even without formal precedent status.

Staying current on all three layers — particularly AAO decisions — is the difference between a petition strategy based on what worked three years ago and one based on what is working now.

Policy and Legal Framework

The foundational documents that define how USCIS adjudicates extraordinary ability petitions:

USCIS Policy Manual EB1A: Line-by-Line Attorney Annotation Annotated walkthrough of USCIS Policy Manual Volume 6, Part F, Chapter 2 — every paragraph with practical implications, adjudicator application patterns, and common attorney mistakes. The standard USCIS adjudicators follow directly.

The Kazarian Standard: Complete EB1A Attorney Reference Legal history of Kazarian v. USCIS (596 F.3d 1115), the two-step framework, USCIS Policy Memo PM-602-0005.1, post-Kazarian AAO decisions, and circuit split context.

USCIS Sustained National or International Acclaim: The Attorney Standard What "sustained national or international acclaim" means in USCIS adjudication — how it differs from a single achievement, what evidence pattern demonstrates sustained acclaim across multiple criteria, and the comparison between EB1A and O-1A standards.

Kazarian Step 2 is where most EB1A cases succeed or fail — not at the criterion level

Attorneys who spend all their time building criterion evidence and then write a brief Step 2 argument are making a strategic error. AAO denials regularly find that a petitioner satisfied three criteria and still failed Step 2 because the evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim in the aggregate. Step 2 requires an explicit argument connecting the criteria evidence into a coherent extraordinary ability narrative.

AAO Decisions and Adjudication Trends

AAO EB1A Decisions 2024–2025: Patterns for Attorneys Approval and denial patterns from recent AAO non-precedent decisions — which criteria arguments succeed and fail, how the AAO applies Kazarian Step 2, and emerging adjudication trends including field-specificity tightening and Criterion 6 scrutiny. The most actionable resource for current petition strategy.

A classical judicial gavel resting on a rectangular block representing AAO administrative appeal decisions and adjudication authority

O-1 Strategy and Policy

O-1 to Green Card: Using O-1 as EB1A Runway When O-1A makes sense before EB1A, how to use the O-1A period to build EB1A-qualifying evidence, timing considerations, and how an approved O-1A affects EB1A adjudication.

The Complete O-1 Visa Petition Guide (2026) O-1A eligibility standard, criteria strategy, advisory opinion letters, and how O-1A adjudication differs from EB1A — including the absence of a Step 2 final merits determination.

Policy changes slowly but adjudication trends shift faster — read AAO decisions quarterly

The regulatory framework for EB1A has been stable since Kazarian. What changes is how adjudicators apply that framework to evidence patterns they are seeing more frequently. An AI infrastructure engineer's EB1A today faces different scrutiny than the same case filed in 2022 — not because the law changed, but because USCIS has processed hundreds of similar cases and developed specific views on what constitutes major significance in AI-related contributions. Reading AAO decisions quarterly is the most efficient way to stay current.

RFE Trends and Prevention

The EB1A RFE Prevention Playbook Eight recurring RFE patterns from 2023–2025 AAO decisions, with USCIS language and prevention checklists for each. Criteria-specific prevention strategies for the most common RFE triggers.

EB1A RFE Response: Step-by-Step Attorney Guide How to parse an RFE, build the response argument, gather supplemental evidence, and manage the 87-day deadline. Includes what to do when the RFE challenges evidence that cannot be supplemented.

Stacked law books with spines facing viewer representing the legal framework and policy documentation governing EB1A adjudication

Quarterly Policy Updates

USCIS EB1A Processing Times & Policy Updates — Q1 2026 Current I-140 processing times, notable AAO decisions from Q4 2025 and Q1 2026, and policy considerations for this quarter. Published quarterly with the latest processing data and adjudication trends.

Statistics and Data

EB1A Petition Statistics and Trends: 2026 Report Filing volumes, approval rates, RFE rates, and processing times. Data sourced from USCIS performance reports, AILA data, and AAO decision analysis.

The practical implication of staying current on policy: an attorney who reads AAO decisions quarterly and tracks USCIS processing trends can proactively adjust their evidence-gathering approach before filing cases that would otherwise receive RFEs. That adjustment — getting named organizational adoption evidence for Criterion 5, or strengthening the Step 2 argument before filing — is far more efficient than an RFE response after the fact. Policy awareness is petition prevention.

Stay current on USCIS trends — automate the petition work. Start your free trial →

EB1A Practice Tips

Get bimonthly guides for immigration attorneys

Criterion deep-dives, workflow tips, and USCIS updates. No spam. Unsubscribe any time.