Federal Court Orders USCIS to Approve EB-1A, Strikes Down 'Final Merits' Standard

On January 28, 2026, a U.S. District Court in Nebraska issued a landmark ruling in Mukherji v. Miller, ordering USCIS to approve an EB-1A extraordinary ability petition it had previously denied. The applicant, Indian journalist Anahita Mukherji, had demonstrated she met five of the ten regulatory criteria required for EB-1A classification, yet USCIS denied her petition by applying a supplemental 'final merits determination' that found she had not demonstrated sustained national acclaim after 2015. The court found that USCIS's reliance on the final merits framework was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Critically, the judge ruled that USCIS cannot apply a substantive adjudicatory standard that materially affects petition outcomes without first going through formal notice-and-comment rulemaking — a legal requirement the agency bypassed. Notably, the court ordered direct approval of the petition rather than remanding it back to USCIS for reconsideration. Such direct approval orders are rare in immigration litigation and reflect the court's strong conclusion that the denial lacked legal basis. While this ruling specifically addresses EB-1A adjudications, its implications for broader USCIS discretion are significant. The principle that USCIS cannot apply informal, uncodified adjudication standards to deny otherwise qualifying petitions could support challenges in other employment-based categories, including EB-3, if similar arbitrary reasoning is applied. USCIS has not yet revised its official guidance in response to the ruling and may appeal. Applicants and attorneys should monitor for any formal policy changes while being aware that this decision strengthens legal challenges to denials based on vague or inconsistent agency reasoning.