When an Irvine-based biotech founder applied for a U.S. visa, he expected a straightforward process.
His startup had received millions from the National Institutes of Health, the largest public funder of biomedical research, and had clinical trials underway.
Instead, the petition triggered multiple requests for evidence, or RFEs, questioning nearly every piece of evidence submitted. And he is far from the only founder facing such scrutiny.
Startup dreams, bureaucracy nightmares
The past year has seen a sharp increase in the number of RFEs issued for visa categories commonly used by entrepreneurs, according to Joseph Robinson, founder of Robinson Immigration Law.
While RFEs are not denials, they can delay approvals by months and significantly increase legal fees, turning immigration into an operational risk for early-stage companies.
Business groups say the trend is particularly concerning for innovation-driven industries that rely on global talent.
Members of the U.S. Hispanic Business Council (USHBC), which represents a growing number of tech founders, report escalating legal fees tied to RFEs and prolonged adjudications.
“Immigrants represent a disproportionate share of advanced STEM talent and patents,” said Javier Palomarez, CEO of USHBC. “If the goal is to keep America competitive in AI, cybersecurity, software development, and advanced manufacturing, immigration policy has to account for the needs of these industries.”
He warns that the shifting rules are creating uncertainty for startups trying to scale, making it harder to build teams around global talent.
Robinson said increasing immigration scrutiny, frequent policy shifts, and aggressive political rhetoric are already pushing some founders to consider building their companies elsewhere.
“Many are looking at alternatives such as the U.K., Canada or returning to their home countries,” he said.
The denial playbook: What entrepreners need to know
Immigration attorneys say the defining trend is growing skepticism from USCIS. Approval for the EB-1A, a U.S. visa for individuals with extraordinary ability and a popular option for international startup founders, is becoming increasingly difficult.
“Officers assume everyone inflates their achievements, especially applicants from less wealthy countries,” said Katya Stelmakh, founder and managing director of Stelmakh & Associates. “Even if you meet all the EB-1A criteria, they still aren’t convinced you’re truly ‘at the top of your field’ or have ‘sustained acclaim.’”
Recent EB-1A denials have included a high-profile entrepreneur, the former head of Meta’s APAC operations. His tech startup was valued highly enough that he was invited to ring the opening bell on Wall Street. Despite these accomplishments, he was denied EB-1A but successfully secured an O-1A visa.
“Another major trend is that USCIS officers appear to be skipping thorough reviews of the 1,000 to 2,000 pages of evidence submitted for EB-1A petitions,” said Stelmakh. “Templated RFEs often contain factual errors, misrepresenting legal arguments.”
Petitions are increasingly returned as incomplete or incorrectly filed, citing missing information or wrong fees, even when the forms are complete or the fees are correct.
O-1 denials for startup founders at U.S. consulates
Approval rates for founder-friendly visas remain relatively high, though EB-1A approvals have fallen to about 50%. Filings have tripled in four years, reaching nearly 7,500 petitions from April to June 2025, up from 2,500 in late 2021, according to USCIS.
O-1 visas are approved about 90% of the time, but more applicants are being denied at U.S. consulates. Unlike EB-1A green cards, which are approved inside the U.S., O-1 candidates must travel abroad for a final interview and visa stamping.
What used to be a routine formality has become the point where some immigrant founders are rejected.
Nicole Gunara, principal immigration attorney at Manifest Law, said her firm is seeing a surge of inquiries from founders backed by U.S. accelerators.
“Some were approved by USCIS but denied at the consulate,” Gunara said. “These aren’t ordinary founders. Some have backing from elite programs like Y Combinator.”
She said officers appear increasingly skeptical. “They’ll say, ‘O-1 professionals are supposed to be masters of the universe.’ The same phrasing keeps coming up, which makes me wonder if there’s internal guidance driving this.”
Gunara added that beyond anti-immigration rhetoric, the AI boom and record-breaking funding may be raising expectations.
“An officer might think, ‘I just approved a founder who raised a $120 million Series A. You’re distinguished because you raised $10 million?’”
Gunara said that as mega-rounds become more common, founders with smaller raises face tougher scrutiny and must more clearly articulate what distinguishes them.
