EB-1ABusiness and managementIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
APR052005_18B2203
High salaryNot metJudgingNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A bank manager in business claimed six EB-1A criteria based on administrative and human resources work. The AAO found she met none of them sufficiently. Her internal materials lacked external recognition, her judging was routine employment duty, and her roles, though notable, did not establish sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.
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
- High salary · Documentation does not support conclusion that petitioner is among highest paid executives in industry.
- Judging · Evaluating applicants for employment in local banking operations is routine job duty, not national or international acclaim.
- Leading or critical role · Role in distinguished establishment insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim.
- Membership · Membership in AIBF lacked evidence of outstanding achievement requirement for admission.
- Original contributions · Claimed but not adequately demonstrated with evidence of major significance.
- Published material · Internal bank materials not disclosed outside employer, insufficient for sustained acclaim.
- Final merits · Failed to establish at least three criteria; evidence does not demonstrate small percentage at top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 High salary | Not met | Documentation does not support conclusion that petitioner is among highest paid executives in industry. |
 Judging | Not met | Evaluating applicants for employment in local banking operations is routine job duty, not national or international acclaim. |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Role in distinguished establishment insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim. |
 Membership | Not met | Membership in AIBF lacked evidence of outstanding achievement requirement for admission. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Claimed but not adequately demonstrated with evidence of major significance. |
 Published material | Not met | Internal bank materials not disclosed outside employer, insufficient for sustained acclaim. |
 Final merits | Not met | Failed to establish at least three criteria; evidence does not demonstrate small percentage at top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.