NIW: If an RFE Contains Incorrect Information, Can the Decision Be Overturned on Appeal?

In the immigration petition process, it is not uncommon for a Request for Evidence (RFE) to contain clear factual errors. For example, USCIS may misunderstand the applicant's major or work history, or claim that "evidence is insufficient" despite the evidence already being submitted. This naturally causes significant frustration.

However, correcting such errors through an appeal or a motion to reopen/reconsider is far more difficult than most people expect.

1️⃣ The Chances of Winning an NIW Appeal Are Extremely Low

In National Interest Waiver (NIW) cases, it is very rare for the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) to overturn a USCIS decision.

From AAO statistics and numerous decisions, we see a consistent pattern:

Even when USCIS:

• misinterprets some facts, or
• fails to consider evidence that was actually submitted,

AAO rarely treats this as administrative error. Instead, AAO generally maintains the original conclusion that the essential requirements were not satisfied.

In other words, even if the RFE contains inaccuracies, the real question remains:

"Did the petitioner convincingly satisfy all legal criteria?"

Simply arguing that the officer "misunderstood" something is almost never enough to win an appeal.

2️⃣ AAO Decisions Show a Consistent Position

Most AAO decisions dismiss appeals based on "incorrect facts" with reasoning similar to:

"Even if the adjudicating officer misstated certain facts, the record as a whole does not demonstrate that the petitioner meets the burden of proof."

This is because NIW petitions fundamentally operate on the principle that:

The petitioner bears the burden of proof.

The issue is not whether USCIS made a mistake, but whether the petitioner proved, through evidence, that they clearly serve the U.S. national interest.

3️⃣ Strategic Approach: Filing a New Petition Is More Effective Than Appealing

Therefore, even if you believe you were unfairly treated due to incorrect information, pursuing an appeal is generally not practical.

A far more realistic and successful strategy is to prepare a new NIW petition, where you can:

• Correct the previous officer's misunderstandings
• Strengthen your evidence
• Present a more detailed and coherent proposed endeavor
• Rebuild the narrative from the ground up

This approach has a dramatically higher success rate than attempting to overturn a denial through appeal.

4️⃣ Conclusion

In summary:

• The likelihood of winning an appeal solely because an RFE contained mistakes is extremely low.
• AAO case law consistently shows that NIW adjudications focus on insufficient evidence, not factual errors.
• Even with an unfair or inaccurate RFE, the wiser choice is usually not to appeal but to file a stronger, newly structured petition.