EB-1ABiotech and pharmaIndividualDecided April 2026Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
APR062026_03B2203
JudgingMetLeading or critical roleMetOriginal contributionsMetPublished materialMetScholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metMembershipNot metCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
CEO and inhaled drug delivery researcher claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability, satisfying five initial evidentiary criteria. AAO held totality of evidence insufficient for final merits determination; petitioner lacked sustained national acclaim and did not demonstrate career of acclaimed work placing him among field's very top.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
What the AAO accepted
- Judging · Accepted by SCOPS; meets judging criterion
- Leading or critical role · Accepted by SCOPS; meets leading or critical role criterion
- Original contributions · Accepted by SCOPS; meets original contributions criterion
- Published material · Accepted by SCOPS; meets published materials criterion
- Scholarly articles · Accepted by SCOPS; meets scholarly articles criterion
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award; awards shown lack contextualization demonstrating excellence in inhaled drug delivery field
- Membership · Memberships in ISAM, ATS, ERS do not distinguish petitioner from others or reflect small percentage at top of field
- Final merits · Despite meeting five criteria, petitioner does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or career of acclaimed work; insufficient to show small percentage at very top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Accepted by SCOPS; meets judging criterion |
 Leading or critical role | Met | Accepted by SCOPS; meets leading or critical role criterion |
 Original contributions | Met | Accepted by SCOPS; meets original contributions criterion |
 Published material | Met | Accepted by SCOPS; meets published materials criterion |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Accepted by SCOPS; meets scholarly articles criterion |
 Awards | Not met | No major internationally recognized award; awards shown lack contextualization demonstrating excellence in inhaled drug delivery field |
 Membership | Not met | Memberships in ISAM, ATS, ERS do not distinguish petitioner from others or reflect small percentage at top of field |
 Commercial success | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or analyzed |
 Exhibitions | Claimed, not analyzed | Not applicable or claimed |
 High salary | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or analyzed |
 Final merits | Not met | Despite meeting five criteria, petitioner does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or career of acclaimed work; insufficient to show small percentage at very top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.