Federal Court Invalidates the “Kazarian Rule” and Reaffirms Statutory Limits on EB-1A Adjudications
Key Takeaways From the January 28, 2026, EB-1A Decision (D. Nebraska)
On January 28, 2026, U.S. District Court held that the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) unlawfully adopted the two-step EB-1A framework, including the ‘final merits determination,’ in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)’s notice-and-comment requirements. The court further found the agency’s adoption and application of that standard was arbitrary and capricious because USCIS failed to acknowledge and provide a reasoned explanation for the policy change.
Practical Impact
- No immediate change to USCIS policy: EB-1A adjudications will likely continue under the current two-step framework for now.
- An appeal is possible: The government may appeal the decision.
- Not binding nationwide: This is a district court decision and does not control other jurisdictions. Other courts could interpret the APA and USCIS’s adjudication approach differently.
Why It Still Matters
- Litigation tool: The decision provides a legal basis to challenge EB-1A denials in federal court on the grounds that the final merits determination step is unlawful.
- Possible persuasive authority: While not controlling, the decision may be persuasive to a limited number of adjudicators and is worth citing in responses to RFEs and NOIDs where final merits reasoning is vague or unsupported.
What to Expect Next
For now, standard processing will likely continue unless and until one of the following occurs:
- USCIS issues new policy guidance,
- an appellate court issues a controlling decision, or
- USCIS initiates a rulemaking process.
FGI will continue to monitor developments and provide updates as the situation evolves.
SOURCE: www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/g925utyvdagrw3atiz8uj/Mukherji-v-Miller-Memorandum-and-Order.pdf?rlkey=12lx8glbzm0au2j4riuxk037n&e=2&dl=0