Key Takeaways
- EB-1 approval rates differ sharply by subcategory. EB-1A has fallen to 32.2%, while EB-1B and EB-1C remain above 93% because employer sponsorship and internal review screen cases before filing.
- EB-1A applicants go through a two-step review. Meeting three regulatory criteria is only the start, and the final merits determination focuses on sustained national or international acclaim and top-of-field standing.
- Most EB-1A denials happen at the final merits stage and cluster among self-petitioners, who do not benefit from the internal vetting that employer-sponsored categories receive.
- Applicants with strong but not yet sustained-acclaim records often find EB-2 NIW more realistic. Its approval rate recently rebounded above 55%.
- Jumpstart Immigration helps founders, executives, and researchers strengthen EB-1 and EB-2 NIW petitions through structured evidence review and clear, credible narratives.
Check Your EB-1 or EB-2 NIW Eligibility
What Is the EB-1 Visa Approval Rate?
The EB-1 visa approval rate is the share of EB-1 I-140 petitions that USCIS approves among cases it decides in a given period. USCIS publishes this by subcategory (EB-1A/E11, EB-1B/E12, EB-1C/E13) in USCIS Data Hub reporting. The rate is computed from approvals divided by approvals plus denials among cases decided in the period. This means it reflects only completed adjudications, not all filed or pending petitions.
That distinction matters. USCIS ended Q1 FY2026 with 11.3 million cases pending, 17% more than at the same point in FY2025. A quarter’s approval rate is a snapshot of completed adjudications for that window. It does not represent the full outcome for everyone who filed in that quarter, and it should not be treated as a fixed probability for any individual case.
The I-140 petition is the core mechanism. It is the immigrant petition filed with USCIS to classify an applicant under an employment-based preference category. Approval of the I-140 establishes eligibility for a green card but does not itself grant permanent residence. Visa availability and adjustment of status or consular processing follow as separate steps.
To understand why approval rates differ so widely, it helps to look at how the three EB-1 subcategories are structured.
EB-1A vs. EB-1B vs. EB-1C Approval Rates: Why They Diverge
The three EB-1 subcategories serve distinct applicant profiles:
- EB-1A is a self-petition for extraordinary ability in sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics. No employer sponsorship, job offer, or labor certification is required under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3).
- EB-1B is for outstanding professors and researchers. It requires employer sponsorship and at least three years of experience in teaching or research.
- EB-1C is for multinational managers and executives. It requires at least one year of employment abroad with a qualifying multinational entity within the three years before filing.
The approval data show a sharp divergence across these subcategories. The table below summarizes who files, sponsorship requirements, and approval rates across the three subcategories.
| Subcategory | Who Files | Employer Sponsorship Required | Approval Rate (FY2025 / Q1 FY2026 / Q3 FY2026) |
|---|---|---|---|
| EB-1A | Self-petitioners with extraordinary ability in sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics | No | 66.9% (FY2025) / 47.5% (Q1 FY2026) / 32.2% (Q3 FY2026) |
| EB-1B | Outstanding professors and researchers sponsored by a university or research institution | Yes | ~97.8% (FY2025) / 94.8% (Q1 FY2026) / 93.0% (Q3 FY2026) |
| EB-1C | Multinational managers and executives sponsored by a qualifying employer | Yes | ~97% (FY2025) / 97.0% (Q1 FY2026) / 97.4% (Q3 FY2026) |
The divergence has a structural explanation. EB-1B and EB-1C are employer-sponsored, so a company and usually its legal team reviews the case before it reaches USCIS. EB-1A, by contrast, is the only EB-1 subcategory allowing self-petitioning, so weaker cases are not filtered out before filing. This pulls the published average down, even though many individual EB-1A cases are approved without difficulty. The EB-1A rate also fell because adjudicators shifted from a criteria-counting exercise to a final merits determination focused on sustained acclaim, which affects self-petitioners most.
The Final Merits Determination in Plain Language
USCIS applies a two-step EB-1A analysis under its Policy Manual. At Step One, the officer determines whether the submitted evidence objectively meets at least three of the ten regulatory criteria in 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). At Step Two, the final merits determination, the officer evaluates the petition in its entirety to decide whether the evidence as a whole establishes sustained national or international acclaim and whether the applicant is among the small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field, as defined in 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2).
The two-step framework originates from Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010) and is codified in the USCIS Policy Manual, Volume 6, Part F, Chapter 2. Meeting three EB-1A regulatory criteria establishes only the required initial evidence; EB-1A is not a points-based system, and the holistic final merits review remains decisive.
Sustained acclaim usually appears as recognition that continues over time, not a single spike of attention. USCIS denials frequently cite records where documented achievements cluster in the short window just before filing, with little evidence of continued visibility or influence across a meaningful span of the applicant’s career. Evidence that supports sustained acclaim includes:
- Media coverage specifically about the applicant and their work in major or professional publications
- Judging the work of others, such as peer review, grant panels, or competition committees, with documentation of selective invitation
- Original contributions of major significance, supported by citation data, adoption by others, or licensing
- Scholarly articles in peer-reviewed publications with measurable reception by the field
- Leading or critical roles at organizations with distinguished reputations, documented beyond job title
- High salary relative to others in the same occupation and geographic area, benchmarked against recognized data sources
Satisfying more EB-1A criteria does not automatically strengthen a petition. Once the three-criteria threshold is met, a petition with three strong criteria may present a more persuasive final merits record than one claiming six marginal categories. The practical takeaway is to audit evidence for sustained acclaim before filing, not after receiving an RFE.
Given these standards, it helps to look at how difficult EB-1 approval actually is in practice.
Is an EB-1 Visa Hard to Get?
The answer depends on subcategory and evidence profile, rather than a single yes or no.
For EB-1A, the bar is high but achievable for applicants with independently verifiable evidence of sustained recognition. A researcher with a substantial citation record, peer-reviewed publications in respected journals, and invitations to judge grant panels or conference submissions has a coherent evidence base. A founder with press coverage specifically about their work, accelerator credentials such as Y Combinator or Residency, and patents tied to documented adoption presents a different but viable profile. An executive with a leading role at a multinational company, documented through organizational charts, scope of authority, and the company’s distinguished reputation, may fit EB-1C more cleanly than EB-1A.
For EB-1B and EB-1C, the path is more structured. EB-1C approval held at 97.4% in Q3 FY2026 because the sponsoring company files these cases and they rely on corporate records rather than personal acclaim, so they rarely fail at the I-140 stage. EB-1B held above 93% across recent quarters because employer sponsorship provides a pre-filing review layer that self-petitions lack.
The difficulty of EB-1A stems from the absence of any structural filter before filing, rather than from the standard itself. EB-1A accounted for 2,832 of the 3,034 total EB-1 denials in Q3 FY2026, so denials are heavily concentrated in the self-petitioned extraordinary ability subcategory.
What Are Common EB-1 Rejection Reasons?
Most EB-1A denials occur at Step Two, the final merits determination, rather than at the criteria-counting stage. EB-1A RFE rates have been estimated at 40–50% in recent fiscal years, and a significant portion of these RFEs are issued because the officer is not satisfied that the overall record demonstrates sustained top-tier standing.
Common patterns in Step Two denials include:
- Evidence presented without comparative context relative to field norms
- Nominal criteria compliance that technically meets plain language but does not reflect genuine top-tier standing
- Lack of independent third-party validation, since letters from collaborators or supervisors carry less weight than letters from independent recognized authorities
- Recency gaps where achievements are several years old with limited evidence of continued activity
- Disconnect between individual criteria and a coherent overall narrative of extraordinary ability
Specific RFE triggers by criterion include:
- Original contributions: USCIS RFEs typically attack the “major significance” half of the criterion rather than originality. A publication count alone does not prove field-level impact.
- Judging: USCIS treats routine journal peer review as a standard professional responsibility. The role must be selective and substantive, with documentation of the invitation and the venue’s standing.
- Leading or critical role: USCIS may look beyond a job title to the applicant’s actual responsibilities, authority, decision-making power, and position within the organizational hierarchy.
- Published material: USCIS reads the regulation strictly to require material “about the alien” rather than about the applicant’s employer, product, or research group.
- Weak narrative: Thin documentation on technically met criteria, no coherent narrative connecting the evidence, and criteria selected based on availability rather than documentary strength are common reasons for denial.
A practical checklist of evidence types that support sustained acclaim includes:
- Media coverage in major or professional publications specifically about the applicant and their work
- Judging invitations with documentation of selectivity and venue standing
- Original contributions supported by citation analysis, adoption metrics, or licensing agreements
- Scholarly articles in peer-reviewed publications with measurable reception
- Leading or critical roles documented through organizational charts, scope of authority, and the organization’s distinguished reputation
- High salary benchmarked against recognized occupational wage data for the correct role and geography
Is EB-1 Better Than EB-2 NIW?
EB-1A and EB-2 NIW are the only two self-petition employment-based immigration categories, so many applicants compare them directly. The decision turns on evidence profile and the legal standard each category applies.
EB-1A requires sustained national or international acclaim and top-of-field standing under the Kazarian two-step framework. EB-2 NIW requires a proposed endeavor of national importance under the Matter of Dhanasar, 26 I&N Dec. 884 (AAO 2016) framework, which is a meaningfully different and, for many researchers and founders, more attainable standard.
EB-1A is the stronger path for applicants who clearly meet the extraordinary-ability standard with independently verifiable evidence across multiple criteria. EB-2 NIW is a strong alternative for founders and researchers whose evidence is substantial but not yet at the sustained-acclaim level required for EB-1A. The EB-2 NIW approval rate was 55.3% in Q3 FY2026, up from a record low of 35.7% in Q4 FY2025, and 55.17% for full FY2025. In Q1 FY2026, the EB-2 NIW approval rate was 42.61%.
A denied EB-1 petition does not affect a separate EB-2 case; the two petitions are adjudicated independently. Filing both concurrently is a relatively low-risk strategic move for applicants who may qualify under either standard.
For a detailed breakdown of the EB-2 NIW approval rate and what it means for founders, see EB-2 NIW Approval Rate 2026: What Founders Need To Know.
What Happens If My EB-1 Is Denied?
A denial closes that specific petition but does not close every path forward. After an EB-1A denial, petitioners generally have four paths: file a motion to reopen or reconsider, appeal to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO), refile a stronger petition, or pursue a different visa category.
The best choice depends on why the case was lost. If the record is fixable with better or new evidence, refiling a stronger petition is often faster than the AAO. If the officer made a legal or procedural error on the existing record, an appeal or motion preserves and challenges that error. Analysis of 1,242 real AAO EB-1A appeal decisions issued between January 2020 and February 2025 found that 33 appeals were sustained (about 3%), 218 were remanded (about 18%), and 991 were dismissed (about 80%). These numbers explain why many applicants choose to refile a strengthened petition instead of appealing.
A prior EB-1A denial is not a statutory bar to refiling, and the new petition must be visibly stronger and directly address the prior denial’s stated grounds. A new I-140 is a fresh adjudication on a fresh record, so criteria approved in a prior petition carry no preclusive weight and must be fully proven again.
A denied EB-1 petition does not affect a separate EB-2 case; the two petitions are adjudicated independently. For applicants whose record supports a national-interest argument under Dhanasar but cannot credibly clear the “very top of the field” bar, EB-2 NIW is often the more realistic pivot.
Many successful EB-1A cases are approved on a second or third attempt once the evidentiary gaps from the earlier denial are addressed directly. The key question becomes which specific gaps the denial identified and whether the applicant can close them with new or better-documented evidence.
How to Improve Your EB-1 Approval Odds
EB-1A approval odds rise when the evidence is strong and the story is coherent, rather than simply voluminous.
A well-documented case built around three or four strong criteria consistently outperforms a broader showing across five or six with thinner documentation. In fact, focusing on depth over breadth usually produces a clearer final merits picture. To put these principles into practice, consider the following strategies:
- Build a coherent acclaim narrative. The EB-1A final merits analysis should shape how a petition is built before filing, rather than being considered for the first time after USCIS issues an RFE or NOID.
- Gather independent validation. Strong EB-1A recommendation letters should come from recognized independent authorities in the applicant’s specific field with no prior working relationship.
- Document leading roles beyond job title. “Leading” means a role with authority or high-level responsibility and “critical” means the applicant’s contributions were essential to the organization’s outcomes or mission. Job titles alone do not prove this.
- Map each criterion to a specific USCIS requirement. Expert letters are most useful when they explain the factual basis for the expert’s opinion. General praise provides limited assistance.
- Ensure evidence spans time. EB-1A requires sustained national or international acclaim. If all of an applicant’s evidence comes from one year or one project, USCIS may question whether the recognition is ongoing.
The I-140 petition process follows a defined sequence:
- Filing: The I-140 petition is submitted to USCIS with the full evidence package and supporting documentation.
- Initial review: USCIS conducts a Step One criteria review to determine whether at least three of the ten regulatory criteria are met.
- RFE stage: If the record is insufficient for a decision, USCIS issues a Request for Evidence. USCIS typically gives 12 weeks to respond to an I-140 EB-1A RFE, with the clock starting on the notice date. Missing the deadline is treated as case abandonment and produces automatic denial.
- NOID stage: A Notice of Intent to Deny signals the officer intends to deny unless the petitioner provides evidence or arguments that overcome the stated concerns. NOIDs on EB-1A typically have shorter deadlines (usually 30 days) and often require substantial new comparative evidence.
- Final merits determination: At Step Two, the officer evaluates the petition in its entirety to assess sustained acclaim and top-of-field standing.
- Decision: USCIS issues an approval or denial. A denial triggers the motion, appeal, or refile options described above.
How Professional Services Typically Help
Professional support can improve EB-1 outcomes at each stage of the petition process. This is because the gap between a strong underlying profile and a successful petition is almost always a presentation and narrative problem rather than a credentials problem.
Structured immigration services typically provide:
- Profile assessment: Evaluating which subcategory, such as EB-1A, EB-1B, EB-1C, or EB-2 NIW, fits the applicant’s evidence before filing.
- Narrative building: Constructing a coherent sustained-acclaim argument that connects each criterion to the final merits standard, not just to the plain language of the regulatory criteria.
- Documentation support: Identifying evidentiary gaps, sourcing independent validation, and ensuring each exhibit serves a specific purpose in the petition record.
- Timeline management: Tracking RFE and NOID deadlines, coordinating expert letters, and managing the filing sequence across concurrent petitions where applicable.
- RFE and NOID response strategy: Addressing the specific USCIS challenges raised rather than adding more of the same evidence type already dismissed.
Jumpstart files U.S. visa and green-card petitions for founders, executives, and operators worldwide. Our methodology is trained directly on USCIS adjudicator decisions, and our approval rate is 98%.
Speak With an Immigration Expert
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
*Jumpstart is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice. All legal services are performed by independent licensed attorneys.
What Is the EB-1A Approval Rate in 2026?
EB-1A averaged 66.9% for all of FY2025, dropped to 47.5% in Q1 FY2026, fell further to 41.7% in Q2 FY2026, and reached 32.2% by Q3 FY2026, the lowest quarterly rate on record, according to USCIS I-140 rec-by-class data. The decline reflects increased application of the final merits determination, which evaluates whether the full record demonstrates sustained national or international acclaim beyond the three-criteria threshold.
Is EB-1B Easier Than EB-1A?
EB-1B has held above 93% in recent quarters because employer sponsorship provides structural evidence and a pre-filing review layer that self-petitions lack. EB-1A is the only EB-1 subcategory allowing self-petitioning, with no employer sponsorship, job offer, or labor certification required. For applicants with a qualifying employer relationship in academia or research, EB-1B is usually a more structurally reliable path than EB-1A.
Can I Self-Petition for EB-1A?
Yes. EB-1A is the only EB-1 subcategory allowing self-petitioning, with no employer sponsorship, job offer, or labor certification required. The applicant files the I-140 directly and must demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim through independently verifiable evidence meeting at least three of the ten regulatory criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3), followed by a final merits determination.
How Long Does EB-1 Take After I-140 Approval?
After I-140 approval, the timeline depends on visa availability for the applicant’s country of chargeability and whether they pursue consular processing or adjustment of status. For most countries other than India and China, EB-1 has historically remained current or near-current in the Visa Bulletin. For India and China, retrogression has created meaningful wait times even after I-140 approval. Premium processing is available for the I-140 stage but does not affect the subsequent visa availability or adjustment process.
What Is the Difference Between EB-1A and EB-2 NIW?
EB-1A requires sustained national or international acclaim and top-of-field standing, evaluated through the two-step Kazarian framework. EB-2 NIW requires a proposed endeavor of national importance under the Matter of Dhanasar framework, a different legal standard that does not require top-of-field standing but does require demonstrated U.S. benefit tied to the applicant’s specific, measurable contributions. Both are self-petition categories with no employer sponsorship or labor certification required. Applicants denied in one may qualify under the other, and the two petitions are adjudicated independently.
What Happens If My EB-1 Is Denied?
If USCIS denies an EB-1 petition, the applicant can consider a motion, an appeal, a refiling with stronger evidence, or a pivot to another category such as EB-2 NIW. The right choice depends on whether the problem lies in the record itself or in how the decision applied the law.
