RFE & NOID Response Case Results

The applicant, a STEM graduate of a top U.S. university with an excellent record and an offer from a research institution, applied for OPT with premium processing.

• The applicant had earlier law enforcement records, one of which resulted in a conviction.
• USCIS asked for all certified court dispositions and arrest reports, but some original reports had been sealed and could not legally be obtained.
• The applicant's F-1 SEVIS record had once been terminated.

• Reconstructed the full court history, showing that relief had been granted and there had been no new records since.
• Substituted other certified documents for the sealed records, leaving no gaps.
• Presented the favorable factors in the applicant's background to support a positive exercise of discretion.
• Turned the earlier SEVIS termination into part of a favorable explanation.

Date	Progress
02/11/2026	OPT application filed (premium processing)
07/13/2026	NOID received
08/05/2026	NOID response filed
08/13/2026	OPT approved

OPT approved (NOID response filed 08/05/2026 · approved 08/13/2026).

A prior conviction does not mean a NOID ends in denial. A complete, well-argued response led USCIS to exercise its discretion favorably.

The applicant applied for OPT before graduating and received a NOID because of a law enforcement record.

• Even without a prosecution, USCIS can deny in its discretion because of a law enforcement record.
• Some records had been sealed by law, making the originals hard to obtain.

• Reviewed every document, including the law enforcement files, and rebuilt a complete factual record with no gaps.
• Tailored the response to the specific circumstances of the record.
• Presented the favorable factors in the applicant's background to support a positive exercise of discretion.

Date	Progress
06/17	NOID received
07/10	NOID response filed
08/10	OPT approved

OPT approved (response filed 07/10 · approved 08/10).

A law enforcement record and a NOID are not the end of the road. What matters is explaining the facts, the legal limits and the supporting reasons clearly, in one response.

The applicant filed for a STEM OPT extension and received a NOID because of an arrest record. With a demanding job, the applicant left the matter almost entirely to the firm.

• The applicant engaged us close to the response deadline, leaving very little preparation time.
• There were few chances to communicate with the applicant, so the team had to drive the document work on its own.

• Worked through the materials overnight after engagement and completed the response with limited back-and-forth.
• Filed a complete response before the deadline.

Date	Progress
02/10/2026	Engaged the firm close to the deadline
02/22/2026	NOID response filed
04/05/2026	STEM OPT extension approved

STEM OPT extension approved (response filed 02/22/2026 · approved 04/05/2026).

However busy work gets, leave room for status issues. The earlier you engage counsel, the more time there is to build a solid response.

The applicant filed for OPT with premium processing and received a NOID because of an arrest record. The applicant had a strong background and a firm grasp of the case details.

• The applicant engaged us only after the NOID arrived, so time was very short.
• The applicant was under heavy stress, so the work covered both the case and keeping the client steady.

• The team stepped in right away, broke the case down and set the priorities for the response.
• Working closely with the applicant, we filed a complete response 14 days after engagement.

Date	Progress
01/06/2026	OPT application filed (premium processing)
02/06/2026	Engaged the firm after the NOID
02/20/2026	NOID response filed
04/02/2026	OPT approved

OPT approved and the job was kept (response filed 02/20/2026 · approved 04/02/2026).

The more complicated the background, the more it pays to assess risk early and leave enough time for a response.

The applicant, already in a stable job, filed for a STEM OPT extension with premium processing and received a NOID because of an arrest record.

• The arrest record raised questions for USCIS that had to be fully answered within the deadline.

• Began preparing the response as soon as the NOID arrived, matching the evidence point by point to USCIS's concerns.
• The applicant cooperated fully and the materials were well prepared.

Date	Progress
10/17/2025	Application filed (premium processing)
12/29/2025	NOID received
01/21/2026	NOID response filed
03/04/2026	STEM OPT extension approved

STEM OPT extension approved (response filed 01/21/2026 · approved 03/04/2026).

For STEM graduates with a steady job, status is the job. Assess the risk ahead of time rather than scrambling after an RFE or NOID arrives.

The applicant, a graduate with a strong academic record, had a criminal history when applying for OPT, and engaged the firm as soon as an RFE arrived at the fingerprint stage.

• A criminal record can lead USCIS to deny in its discretion, and a NOID was likely to follow the RFE.

• While answering the RFE, we prepared the next set of materials in advance, anticipating the NOID's concerns.
• Filed the NOID response within six days of receiving it.

Date	Progress
Early December 2025	Fingerprint-stage RFE received; consulted right away
12/16/2025	RFE response filed; follow-up materials prepared
01/16/2026	NOID received
01/22/2026	NOID response filed
01/27/2026	OPT approved

Approved five days after the NOID response (filed 01/22/2026 · approved 01/27/2026).

Engaging early makes it possible to plan ahead. Here most of the material was ready before the NOID arrived.

The applicant held a two-year conditional green card and filed Form I-751 to remove the conditions. During the case the applicant divorced and had spent about a year and a half in China, and then received a NOID.

• With the marriage over, the applicant had to prove the marriage had been genuine.
• A long absence invites questions about abandoning permanent residence or failing to maintain residence.

• Gathered genuine evidence from the years of the marriage to answer USCIS's concerns about its bona fides.
• Explained the long absence with reference to COVID-19 and other circumstances beyond the applicant's control.
• Prepared the applicant for the interview and biometrics.

Date	Progress
01/03/2022	I-751 filed
06/05/2023	NOID received
07/01/2023	NOID response filed
08/09/2024	Interview scheduled
09/17/2024	Biometrics and interview completed
10/03/2025	10-year green card approved
10/10/2025	Card produced

10-year green card approved (NOID response filed 07/01/2023 · approved 10/03/2025).

The applicant was selected in the second H-1B lottery round, and the employer filed the I-129 as a change of status. While it was pending, the applicant had to leave the United States for reasons beyond the applicant's control and then received a NOID.

• The petition requested a change of status, but the applicant was abroad before approval, so the original request no longer worked.
• USCIS questioned the applicant's status compliance and the employer's need to retain the applicant.

• Helped the employer present a strong business case for how central the position was to the company.
• Switched the request to consular processing, preserving the second-round lottery selection.

Date	Progress
10/09/2024	I-129 filed (second-round selection)
03/01/2025	NOID received
03/15/2025	NOID response filed
04/06/2025	H-1B approved for consular processing

H-1B approved and activated through consular processing (response filed 03/15/2025 · approved 04/06/2025).

If you must travel while a change of status is pending, assess the impact on the petition early and adjust the plan in time.

The applicant, an F-1 student admitted to a new school, entered the United States on the new I-20. CBP sent the applicant to secondary inspection and then admitted the applicant, but the officer linked the SEVIS record to the old school's I-20 instead of the new one. The new SEVIS record was never activated, the old school's record was later terminated automatically, and the applicant received a Notice to Appear (NTA) placing the applicant in removal proceedings.

• The problem was not a status violation by the applicant; it came from a CBP data-entry error at the port of entry.
• The case involved CBP, USCIS, the school's DSO and the immigration court (EOIR) at the same time: CBP has limited procedures for changing records, USCIS relies on SEVIS status, the DSO cannot correct CBP's entry on its own, and once the NTA was filed the case was already in court.
• With an NTA pending, the usual fix of leaving and re-entering to activate SEVIS was no longer available, and leaving without advice could have hurt the court case and future applications.

• Rebuilt the full entry and status timeline and checked the SEVIS records, I-94, every I-20 and the school's documents, confirming that the error was CBP's.
• Contacted the CBP office repeatedly, explained the facts and submitted supporting evidence.
• Assembled a complete document chain showing the applicant had always attended school as F-1 rules require, with no intentional violation.
• Kept USCIS and the school informed to confirm the records, filed an explanation and supporting materials with EOIR, and answered each agency's follow-up questions with more evidence.

CBP agreed to correct the entry record, and the status problem caused by the data-entry error was resolved.

After every entry, check that your I-94 and SEVIS record point to the right school, and after changing schools make sure you travel on the newest valid I-20. If your SEVIS status looks wrong or you receive an NTA, talk to a lawyer before leaving the country.