EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
APR052005_01B2203
AwardsNot metJudgingNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Self-petitioner research scientist claimed extraordinary ability through awards, memberships, citations, and judging. AAO held research grants unsubstantiated, memberships lacked outstanding achievement requirements, citation record not applicable to criterion, and judging work insufficient. Evidence shows talent but not top-level sustained acclaim. Appeal dismissed.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.
What was missing
- Awards · Research grants and fellowship appointments asserted without supporting documentary evidence; insufficient to meet criterion
- Judging · Peer reviewer role and mentoring participation insufficient for extraordinary ability standard; conference presentation invitations do not meet criterion
- Membership · National Magnetic Resonance Society and Indian Biophysical Society memberships not documented; noteworthy achievement differs from outstanding achievement requirement
- Published material · Citation record significant but not relevant to criterion; cannot meet three separate criteria through citation evidence alone
- Final merits · Evidence shows talent in research but not sustained national or international acclaim at small percentage top level
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Research grants and fellowship appointments asserted without supporting documentary evidence; insufficient to meet criterion |
 Judging | Not met | Peer reviewer role and mentoring participation insufficient for extraordinary ability standard; conference presentation invitations do not meet criterion |
 Membership | Not met | National Magnetic Resonance Society and Indian Biophysical Society memberships not documented; noteworthy achievement differs from outstanding achievement requirement |
 Published material | Not met | Citation record significant but not relevant to criterion; cannot meet three separate criteria through citation evidence alone |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence shows talent in research but not sustained national or international acclaim at small percentage top level |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.