EB‑1C RFE: Why It Happens and How to Respond

An EB-1C RFE (Request for Evidence) means USCIS believes the evidence submitted with the Form I-140 does not fully establish one or more EB-1C requirements. The employer must respond to the issues identified in the notice by the deadline listed on the RFE. Importantly, an RFE is not a denial. It gives the petitioner the chance to address evidentiary deficiencies or clarify questions. An EB-1C RFE, or even an EB-1C denial, does not mean the employer is out of options, though.

If an EB-1C petition receives an RFE, an employer may need to provide additional evidence about the beneficiary's foreign and U.S. managerial or executive roles, the relationship between the qualifying companies, staffing, payroll, or the petitioning employer's ability to pay.

For the first three fiscal quarters of 2026, USCIS data reveals over 9,400 EB-1C petitions were approved compared to just 275 denials. Learn more about EB-1 approval rates.

What can trigger an EB-1C RFE, NOID, or denial?

EB-1C RFEs and Notices of Intent to Deny (NOIDs), as well as denials, may arise when the evidence does not establish every requirement or when the submitted documents fail to tell a consistent story. Pressing issues may involve the beneficiary's managerial or executive capacity, qualifying foreign employment, the corporate relationship between the entities, or the petitioning employer's ability to pay.

The U.S. role looks operational rather than managerial or executive

A central question for an EB-1C regards what the beneficiary will actually do in the proposed U.S. position. This distinguishes it from other EB-1 categories. Job titles such as "director," "vice president," or "general manager" do not by themselves establish managerial or executive capacity.

USCIS will examine the beneficiary's actual duties, the organizational structure, subordinate employees, the nature of the business, and other evidence to determine whether the beneficiary will primarily perform qualifying managerial or executive duties.

This, in turn, creates a potential "doer versus manager" problem. A job description, for example, that focuses on verbs like "collaborate," "strategize," "support," or "execute" may describe important work but fail to clearly establish managerial authority. In an I-140, words matter.

A first-line supervisor generally does not qualify as a manager just by supervising others, unless the employees they supervise are professionals. If the beneficiary's direct reports are not professionals, the petition needs to show managerial authority in another way.

Functional-manager cases require a different showing: the record should identify the essential function being managed, explain its importance to the organization, and establish the beneficiary's senior-level authority over that function.

A petition will not be disqualified because a beneficiary has a non-managerial title, but when the title, duties, org chart, and supporting documents point to an individual-contributor role, substantial evidence is needed to explain the beneficiary's managerial role.

The foreign managerial or executive role is not sufficiently documented

The EB-1C petition must establish the beneficiary's qualifying employment abroad. Specifically, the beneficiary must have worked abroad in a managerial or executive capacity for at least one year during the applicable three-year period. RFEs and NOIDs might be triggered because USCIS needs detailed evidence concerning the foreign role, including:

• The beneficiary's duties
• The foreign company's organizational structure
• Reporting relationships
• Employees supervised or the function managed
• Staffing levels
• Employee duties and salaries
• Payroll records
• Evidence establishing senior-level authority

Remember, prior approval for L-1A doesn't eliminate the need for this documentation because the EB-1C petition has its own eligibility requirements. Ensure that all the evidence, including letterheads and organizational charts, is consistent.

The organizational record is inconsistent

An EB-1C petition becomes harder to evaluate when its documents tell different stories. An organizational chart might show a beneficiary supervising employees while payroll records illustrate a different arrangement. A job description could describe the beneficiary as a senior manager, while another document uses verbs that make the person sound like an individual contributor. Employee titles, reporting lines, headcounts, project names, and employer letters can also conflict.

Discrepancies between the petitioner's assertions and supporting documentation can easily create uncertainty about whether a beneficiary occupies a qualifying managerial or executive position. The solution is never to leave out unfavorable evidence. Instead, the employer and immigration counsel should review the entire record, identify discrepancies, and determine how to address the questions in the RFE notice, or when considering refiling.

The qualifying corporate relationship is unclear

Because the EB-1C classification requires a qualifying relationship between the U.S. petitioner and the foreign entity involved in the beneficiary's qualifying employment, USCIS can have issues with a petition if the connections are muddy. The multinational organization must do business in at least two countries, including the U.S. An RFE may therefore request additional evidence of ownership, control, or the relationship between the business entities.

Potential evidence can include:

• Corporate formation and ownership documents
• Organizational records
• Acquisition or reorganization documents
• Consolidated financial or tax records
• Regulatory filings or approvals
• Evidence that the relevant entities are still in operation

The appropriate evidence will depend on the corporate structure and the issue identified in the RFE.

The employer has not established ability to pay

Ability to pay is a separate issue from whether the beneficiary qualifies as a multinational manager or executive.

For an employment-based immigrant petition requiring an offer of employment, the petitioner must establish that it can pay the offered wage from the priority date onward. Evidence can include federal tax returns and schedules, annual reports, audited financial statements, and payroll records.

If the petitioning entity does not file a traditional U.S. corporate income tax return (like some financial institutions), additional explanations may be required. In these cases, the petitioner may need to provide other records that allow USCIS to evaluate the employer's financial position.

Remember to respond to the specific financial evidence USCIS requests rather than assuming that evidence from other sections of the petition will establish ability to pay.

USCIS flags administrative errors

Administrative errors, such as leaving out important evidence, can easily result in an RFE or NOID. Since USCIS's August 5, 2026 policy update (PA-2026-05), officers have discretion to deny a petition that is missing required initial evidence without sending an RFE first. That makes a complete initial filing more important than ever. Part of the process includes simple administrative checks, like ensuring you're filing the correct form editions.

How long does an employer have to respond to an EB-1C RFE?

Pay attention to the deadline printed on the RFE. There is no universal EB-1C RFE response period. USCIS regulations cap the RFE response period at 12 weeks. Since August 2026, officers are no longer expected to give the full 12 weeks, and some RFEs now allow about 30 days. The deadline printed on your notice controls, and USCIS will not grant extra time. Employers should review the notice immediately and confirm the exact due date with immigration counsel. Submit the response according to the instructions in the RFE.

If a deadline falls on a weekend or federal holiday, counsel should confirm the applicable USCIS filing rules rather than assuming that additional time is available. In the past, if a deadline fell on a weekend or holiday, USCIS accepted documents by the end of the following business day, but you should never assume this. The deadline is for receipt, either physically (i.e., by mail or otherwise delivered to a USCIS facility) or submitted online. USCIS does not consider postmark dates.

Because an RFE response is generally the petitioner's opportunity to address the identified issues, waiting until the deadline is close creates unnecessary risk.

How should an employer respond to an EB-1C RFE?

Read the entire notice carefully and work with immigration counsel to identify every factual question, evidentiary request, and eligibility issue. Sometimes this means mapping each request to the original petition to determine what you submitted, what USCIS found insufficient, and what additional evidence exists. Contradictions among job descriptions, organizational charts, payroll, staffing records, employer letters, and other exhibits increase the risk of RFEs and NOIDs.

Because the employer is the petitioner, it must establish eligibility. The beneficiary may need to provide employment records and other information, but the employer usually coordinates the response and ensures the evidence reflects the company's operations accurately.

Rebuild the managerial-capacity narrative with objective evidence

A strong response needs to do more than repeat the job description from the original petition. It connects the claimed managerial authority to records generated through the company's ordinary business activities. Depending on the issue, useful evidence may include:

• Emails directing employees or assigning work
• Records showing project or strategic approvals
• Performance reviews or approval records
• Budget authority
• Internal planning documents
• Evidence of hiring or personnel decisions, when relevant
• Detailed recognition from senior leadership that explains the beneficiary's role and authority

These documents are most useful when they showcase a managerial responsibility identified in the RFE. While meeting invitations and calendar entries can corroborate a beneficiary's involvement in a project, they are not ideal for establishing managerial authority.

Of course, the evidence must also be truthful. The employer should not create or inflate a managerial scope solely for an immigration filing.

Document the foreign and U.S. roles separately

Treat the foreign position and proposed U.S. position as separate evidentiary showings. For each role, establish:

• Which entity employed the beneficiary
• The dates of employment
• The beneficiary's duties
• Reporting relationships
• Staffing structure
• Level of authority
• The evidence supporting the claimed role

Then connect the two roles through the beneficiary's employment history and the qualifying relationship between the entities.

This approach will help avoid relying on a broad statement like that the beneficiary has "always" been a manager. The record should detail what the beneficiary did in each qualifying position.

Make organizational charts, staffing, payroll, and financial records work together

An organizational chart should not stand alone. The chart, job descriptions, payroll records, employee information, and supporting financial documentation should collectively clarify the company's structure. The evidence should show who reports to whom, what subordinate employees do, and how the beneficiary's role fits into the organization.

This is particularly important when the petition relies on subordinate staff to establish managerial capacity. Financial records serve multiple purposes. Payroll evidence may help corroborate the staffing structure while also supporting the employer's ability to pay. Where an entity uses financial reporting that does not resemble a traditional corporate tax return, additional documentation and explanation will likely be necessary. The goal is a record in which the major exhibits reinforce one another rather than create competing or confusing versions of the company's structure.

What happens after USCIS receives the RFE or NOID response?

After reviewing the response, USCIS may approve the petition, deny it, or, possibly, issue another notice if additional questions arise. The outcome depends on the record and the issues presented in the case. A denial after an RFE response has separate considerations, including potential review or appeal options. Employers should discuss those options with immigration counsel if the petition is ultimately denied.

What are an employer's options after an EB-1C denial?

An EB-1C denial does not mean you've exhausted all options. Consult with your attorneys about what to do next, which might mean:

• Filing a new EB-1C petition that strengthens any issues pointed out in the initial filing
• Filing a motion to reopen or reconsider the decision
• Appealing to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO), which can take a long time and is not always the fastest path to a new decision
• Considering pivoting to the EB-1A or EB-1B category — qualifying for an EB-1A might make sense if you have independent, extraordinary professional achievements, while the EB-1B is geared toward academics and researchers

How can an employer reduce the risk of an EB-1C RFE or NOID?

The best time to address avoidable evidentiary gaps is before filing an I-140. Check the petition against every EB-1C requirement, reconcile job titles and duties with business records, document both the foreign and U.S. roles, establish the qualifying corporate relationship, support the organizational structure, and address ability to pay. The filing should be understandable to an adjudicator without relying on unexplained or complicated internal company terminology. While careful preparation can reduce gaps, avoiding an RFE is never guaranteed.

This is why legal help can be so valuable. For employers or beneficiaries preparing an initial EB-1C petition or responding to an RFE, an immigration attorney can review the existing record, identify gaps, and help organize a response around the specific issues USCIS has raised. Speak to an expert at Manifest today.

FAQs about EB-1C RFEs

Does prior L-1A approval prevent an EB-1C RFE?

No. A prior L-1A approval may be relevant to an EB-1C petition, but it does not automatically establish eligibility for the immigrant classification.

Does USCIS publish an EB-1C RFE or post-RFE approval rate?

USCIS publishes processing information for immigration benefits, but it does not publish a standard public metric for the current EB-1C-specific RFE rate or post-RFE approval rate. Case outcomes will depend on the issues raised and the evidence submitted.

Can USCIS deny an EB-1C petition after an RFE response?

Yes. An RFE gives the petitioner an opportunity to address questions or evidentiary deficiencies; it does not mean approval will occur automatically when questions are answered. USCIS can deny a petition if the response and existing record do not establish eligibility.

What is the three-year rule for EB-1C foreign employment?

Generally, an EB-1C beneficiary must have been employed outside the United States in a managerial or executive capacity for at least one year during the applicable three-year period. If the beneficiary is outside the U.S., the three years are the three years before the petition is filed. If the beneficiary is already in the U.S. working for the same employer or a related entity, the look-back is the three years before they entered as a nonimmigrant.

Can USCIS issue a second RFE?

Yes, a second RFE can occur in some proceedings. Employers should never assume that they will receive another opportunity to supplement the record. The initial RFE response should therefore address the notice completely and within the applicable deadline.