Skip to content

RFE objection "Passed initial, but not final merits": how it was answered

Key answer

Even if the publications are acknowledged, the officer does not see enough weight in the evidence at the Final Merits Determination stage. Add context showing the significance of the publications: citations, use of the work, independent reviews, impact on the field, and comparative metrics.

The objection belongs to the "Authorship" criterion. Below is what the community did to close it: the order of steps, the documents that were attached and the wording that went into the answer.

Steps that closed it

  1. Show not only the fact of authorship, but also the significance of the work for the field
  2. Connect each key article to independent impact: citations, implementation, discussion, use by other researchers
  3. Highlight the petitioner's personal contribution: idea, method, analysis, experiment, writing, supervision
  4. Prepare a publication table with role, journal, indexing, citations, and significance of the result
  5. Add independent expert letters explaining why the works are important, not just confirming familiarity
  6. Address weak points: coauthorship without a role, low citation counts, local publications - through evidence of quality and practical impact

What was attached

  • List of articles with DOIs, journals, dates, impact factors, or indexing
  • Citation profiles and screenshots from scholarly databases
  • Examples of independent works that cite or use the results
  • Letters from independent experts with a specific description of the contribution
  • Evidence of implementation: protocols, methods, patents, clinical or technical applications
  • Documents on peer review, invited presentations, editorial or expert roles, if they are connected to the publications
  • Brief explanation for each article: problem - contribution - result - impact

How the answer was worded

Authorship is confirmed not only by the existence of publications, but also by the petitioner's substantial contribution to the development of the method, which was published in peer-reviewed journals, cited by independent researchers, and used in subsequent works as a basis for further research.

A pattern, not a template to copy: the wording only works with your own facts behind it.

Where to check this

Other objections on this criterion

Reference information and community experience, not legal advice. The AAO figures are lessons from appeals, not approval odds; fees and timelines change - verify on uscis.gov.