Identify the proper review authority
Determine whether an AAO appeal, reopening, reconsideration or a different agency remedy is legally available.
FORM I-290B · USCIS DENIALS · ATTORNEY REVIEW
An unfavorable USCIS decision does not always end a case. Form I-290B can provide an avenue to appeal certain USCIS decisions or ask the agency to reopen or reconsider them. The Messersmith Law Firm, P.A. evaluates legal mistakes, disputed evidence and new facts to determine whether a defensible challenge is available.
The Messersmith Law Firm, P.A. · Immigration representation since 2002
THE DIRECT ANSWER
Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, is used in certain USCIS matters to request administrative review or seek reopening or reconsideration of an unfavorable decision. It is not a universal immigration appeal for all denials.
An AAO appeal may be available where the Administrative Appeals Office has jurisdiction over the decision. A motion to reopen identifies new facts supported by documentary evidence. A motion to reconsider identifies errors of law or policy based on the record as it existed at the time of the decision.
A case may involve both new evidence and legal mistakes, but a combined motion must independently satisfy both standards. The decision notice, affected benefit and petitioner's standing determine which remedies are actually available.
ATTORNEY REPRESENTATION
Our review focuses on whether the agency's adverse conclusion can be challenged under the applicable appeal or motion standard, rather than assuming that filing Form I-290B will itself resolve the case.
Determine whether an AAO appeal, reopening, reconsideration or a different agency remedy is legally available.
Examine the actual findings alongside the application, prior submissions and material evidence USCIS received.
Analyze whether USCIS correctly applied statutory eligibility, regulatory requirements, relevant policy and the burden of proof.
For reopening, determine whether reliable new facts and supporting documentation address the basis for the decision.
Distinguish the rights of applicants, petitioning employers, family petitioners and beneficiaries, who do not always have the same ability to seek review.
Evaluate possible effects on lawful status, derivative family members, employment authorization and related pending filings.
DECISION-SPECIFIC REPRESENTATION
Appeal rights vary by benefit type. Even when no AAO appeal exists, a motion or other case-specific response may warrant examination.
Some I-140 denials involve disputed eligibility, professional qualifications, classification requirements or evaluation of expert evidence.
Employment green card services ↗Some nonimmigrant petition denials or revocations raise questions about employer facts, qualifying duties, worksite records or regulatory interpretation.
Work visa representation ↗A motion may be available for certain denials involving admissibility, statutory eligibility, mistaken facts or misunderstood immigration history; an AAO appeal may not be.
Adjustment of status services ↗Available review turns on the particular waiver authority, discretionary record, hardship evidence where required and jurisdiction over the decision.
I-601 waiver representation ↗Family petition appeals can involve BIA jurisdiction rather than the ordinary AAO I-290B route. A case-specific motion may present a different possibility.
Marriage green card services ↗Pending evidence requests and proposed denials or revocations call for a different legal response from an appeal of a final decision.
USCIS Request for Evidence representation ↗A Form I-290B is generally not the review vehicle for an immigration court, BIA, Department of Labor or consular decision. The decision itself, not the client's preferred form, determines the proper remedy.
CHALLENGE ERRONEOUS USCIS FINDINGS
An adverse decision is not necessarily legally sound. Attorney review can identify concrete factual or legal vulnerabilities that warrant reconsideration, reopening or an authorized administrative appeal.
A decision may fail to consider probative documents already in the record or misunderstand the significance of submitted evidence.
USCIS may apply an inapplicable requirement, conflate distinct benefit categories or misunderstand the relevant burden of proof.
Allegations involving fraud, immigration status, employment or eligibility must be evaluated under the actual statutory elements and reliable facts.
Credible new facts may address a genuine evidentiary gap and support reopening where the regulatory requirements are met.
TIMING · JURISDICTION · CONSEQUENCES
An AAO appeal concerns eligible decisions within appellate jurisdiction. Reopening depends on new facts; reconsideration focuses on the law and record at decision.
Many eligible I-290B matters involve a 30-day period, with service rules affecting some notices. Different categories and exceptional circumstances may alter the analysis.
USCIS may excuse some late reopening motions if strict regulatory criteria are met, but the same flexibility generally does not exist for reconsideration.
Submitting an appeal or motion ordinarily does not grant lawful status, extend employment authorization or stay a removal action. Consequences depend on the case.
The original denial or revocation notice and governing classification control. This is general legal information, not instructions for selecting or filing a particular remedy.
COMPARE YOUR OPTIONS
The comparison is alphabetized by category; CFR authorities appear at the bottom. The correct review path is determined by the actual decision.
| Form or review type | Common situation | Principal consideration | Classification |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAO appeal | USCIS denial in a category with AAO jurisdiction | Whether the statute or regulation authorizes administrative appellate review | Administrative appeal |
| Combined motion | New facts and a claimed legal error | Separate reopening and reconsideration standards both apply | USCIS motion |
| I-140 | Certain employment immigrant petition denials | Petitioner standing, classification and available AAO review | Immigrant petition |
| I-290B | Eligible USCIS appeal or motion | Decision type, standing, jurisdiction and applicable review standard | Notice of Appeal or Motion |
| I-485 | Some adjustment denial decisions | Motion availability, admissibility and any immigration court jurisdiction | Adjustment application |
| Motion to reconsider | Claimed legal or policy error in an adverse USCIS decision | Explain error based on law and record at time of decision | USCIS motion |
| Motion to reopen | New facts supported by affidavits or documents | New evidence must be relevant to the eligibility finding | USCIS motion |
| NOID / NOIR | Proposed denial or petition revocation | Notice response is not the same as review of a final denial | Predecision notice |
| RFE | USCIS requests additional evidence | Responding to a pending request differs from appealing a final denial | Predecision evidence request |
| 8 CFR 103.3 | USCIS administrative appeals and jurisdiction | Standing, appealability and AAO review authority | Regulatory authority |
| 8 CFR 103.5 | Motions to reopen or reconsider | Different evidentiary and legal standards; timeliness | Regulatory authority |
| 8 CFR 103.8(b) | Service and time computation | Mail-service rules may affect the applicable period | Regulatory authority |
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Answers to common questions about appealing USCIS denials, reopening decisions, reconsideration and related immigration consequences.
Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, is used to seek review of certain unfavorable USCIS decisions. Whether it supports an administrative appeal, a motion, or both depends on the specific decision and applicable authority.
Yes, when an available review mechanism and the record support a challenge. Counsel assesses the decision, legal standard, evidence, jurisdiction, and whether an appeal, reopening, reconsideration, or another remedy is appropriate.
An eligible appeal generally asks the Administrative Appeals Office to review a USCIS decision. A motion generally asks the deciding office or other authorized USCIS decision maker to revisit its decision under defined reopening or reconsideration standards.
A motion to reopen states new facts and is supported by affidavits or other documentary evidence. Its strength depends on the relevance and credibility of that material and the governing eligibility standard.
A motion to reconsider identifies an incorrect application of law or policy and explains why the decision was wrong based on the record at the time of decision. It is not simply a second opportunity to present an unsupported disagreement.
Certain eligible matters permit combined motions addressing new facts and errors of law. Both independent regulatory standards must be addressed; combining them does not eliminate applicable eligibility, jurisdiction, or timeliness rules.
Not necessarily. An appeal can contest legal or factual errors in an existing record. Whether new material may be submitted and considered depends on the governing appeal requirements and the nature of the filing.
Potentially. Where the written decision fails to account for material evidence in the record, counsel can assess whether the oversight affected the controlling legal analysis and supports review.
Potentially. Misapplication of a statute, regulation, precedent or adjudicative burden can be central to an appeal or motion to reconsider. The argument must identify a concrete error tied to the decision.
A challenge may be warranted when the agency has conflated inconsistency with willful misrepresentation, misunderstood the evidence, or applied the wrong materiality standard. The particular statutory ground and record govern.
No. Appeal rights vary by benefit type and statutory or regulatory authority. Some decisions allow motions but no AAO appeal; others may be reviewed elsewhere or have special review procedures.
Form I-290B generally does not replace the procedures for immigration court or Board of Immigration Appeals decisions. Those proceedings have different authority, forms, and deadlines.
Department of Labor decisions ordinarily have agency-specific review procedures, not USCIS Form I-290B. An immigration petition affected by a labor determination requires a separate jurisdictional analysis.
No, an ordinary consular visa refusal is not an AAO decision reviewable simply by filing I-290B. Counsel must analyze the refusal basis and possible consular or other remedies.
Review options are highly fact-specific. Some I-485 denials may permit an I-290B motion but not an AAO appeal; removal proceedings or other jurisdictional issues can change the analysis.
Certain I-140 petition denials or revocations may carry AAO appeal rights, generally held by the petitioner or appropriate party with standing. The classification and decision notice must be reviewed.
In eligible petition categories, the petitioning employer may hold the right to seek AAO review or file a motion. Beneficiaries generally cannot assume independent standing solely because they are affected.
I-130 petition appeals generally follow a distinct Board of Immigration Appeals route rather than the usual AAO I-290B appeal. Certain motion options may remain, depending on the notice and governing rules.
Not automatically. Filing an appeal or motion does not itself confer lawful immigration status, an employment authorization, or a stay of an adverse decision. The effect on pending benefits must be analyzed separately.
No. A motion or appeal does not generally stay execution of an adverse decision unless applicable law provides otherwise or appropriate relief is granted. Related immigration risks warrant prompt assessment.
Most eligible I-290B appeals and motions are subject to short filing periods, commonly 30 days, with mail-service rules potentially relevant. Special categories and rules differ, so the actual decision notice controls.
Some late motions to reopen may receive limited discretionary consideration if the delay was reasonable and outside the filer’s control. Comparable flexibility does not generally apply to untimely motions to reconsider, and appeals follow their own requirements.
The available options depend on whether the decision came from a field office, service center or the AAO, and whether another motion, administrative remedy or judicial review is legally available. Repeat filings alone do not cure the original deficiency.
Processing times vary with the agency, benefit, record complexity and whether the case requires further development. There is no reliable universal decision date, and a filing does not guarantee reversal.
Yes. If a principal petition or adjustment application affects derivative eligibility, a denial or adverse motion outcome can have related consequences. Each family member’s current status and independent options require review.
Promptly after receiving an adverse decision. The firm can evaluate whether review is legally available, identify the strongest supportable errors or new facts, and explain the implications for the person’s broader immigration situation.
AUTHORITATIVE LEGAL REFERENCES
The rules can change and are not the same for every benefit. The written decision and current agency guidance determine available rights.
CLIENT TESTIMONIALS
Clients recognize the firm's careful preparation, responsiveness, and commitment to finding the appropriate legal strategy for their immigration cases.
Throughout the process, Peter was knowledgeable, professional, and straightforward. His assistant, Jen, was also outstanding. She was always patient, responsive, and willing to answer my questions promptly, which made a very stressful immigration process much easier.
Peter is the best immigration attorney you can ask for. He guided me through the entire employment-based green card process, from the EB-2 NIW petition to receiving my green card.
Peter and Jen are very reachable and patient. They are detail-oriented and very knowledgeable. I really enjoy working with them! If you choose them, you will be in good hands.
From the very outset, Mr. Messersmith and his team exhibited a level of professionalism and dedication that exceeded my expectations.
I found Peter online but I have to say I’m so lucky to find Peter as my immigration lawyer. He is the best lawyer I’ve met before.
Peter and his team helped me get approved for both an NIW and EB1A (extra ordinary ability), which ultimately led to a green card.
We had a great experience working with Peter, he supported me and the family through the EB 1 and I 485 application process.
His team has fast and quick communication - typically you will get a response in 1 business day
Peter assisted me in filing a waiver in order to reapply for a student visa into the US. He was very knowledgeable about the different laws and procedures, and could always answer all of my many questions.
I am writing to express my deepest gratitude for the exceptional legal representation and support you provided during the challenging process of resolving the issue with my H-4 visa application.
Peter and his expert team helped me to take care of my wife's immigration case. They were super valuable, helpful, kind, and caring people.
Peter and team helped me get EB1A approved. Most of the lawyers I contacted would say my case is hard for EB1A, but Peter reviewed my CV and rightly advised during each step of the EB1 process. He also filed my NIW which got approved too.
Mr. Messersmith is very knowledgeable and methodical, and can work on cases that are complicated and not necessarily normal.
The Messersmith Law Firm is one of the finest law firm in the US.
Very professional and helpful. Messersmith Law Firm are the best Immigration Lawyers. Peter is very helpful and guides you all the way in all the documentation and filing.
He is quite professional and gave me a lot of advice.
Mr. Messersmith is the most excellent lawyer I have ever experienced, he has successfully helped me in three of my legal cases, I really appreciate it.
Very experienced to help me and my family successfully got the permanent resident cards, it's a good choice.
Best immigration attorney!
I liked Peter's calm, honest, and balanced approach to our very difficult immigration problem.
Went very smoothly. Very fast responses to my inquiries. Always sent me an email when a status would change.
Peter is great. I found him online and scheduled an interview with him, letting him review my CV.
The office of Mr. Peter did a great job preparing and submitting my application for a green card.
He was very quick to response and he explains everything clearly. He even checked my recommendation letters!
Extremely intelligent and committed team, highly effective, efficient and there to stand by you when you need them most.
These selected testimonials reflect individual client experiences. Results vary according to the facts and circumstances of each matter.
THE MESSERSMITH LAW FIRM, P.A.
Whether you received an employment petition denial, an adjustment decision or an adverse waiver determination, our firm can assess the record, distinguish the available remedies and identify whether a compelling challenge can be made.