Outcome: Dismissed
APR122023_01B2203
Our summary
Cancer research scientist sought EB-1A classification based on extraordinary ability. Petitioner claimed membership and original contributions criteria in addition to judging and scholarly articles already found met. AAO affirmed membership criterion was not satisfied and original contributions lacked required major significance. Overall, evidence did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or placement at the very top of the field.
Official PDF
The official PDF link for this decision is being verified.
Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
What the AAO accepted
- Judging · Director found criterion satisfied; AAO affirmed on appeal
- Scholarly articles · Director found criterion satisfied; AAO affirmed on appeal
What was missing
- Membership · ASCO and RSOU membership do not require outstanding achievements as judged by recognized experts
- Original contributions · Evidence does not demonstrate contributions of major significance to the field
- Final merits · Record does not show sustained national or international acclaim or placement among small percentage at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Director found criterion satisfied; AAO affirmed on appeal | |
| Met | Director found criterion satisfied; AAO affirmed on appeal | |
| Not met | ASCO and RSOU membership do not require outstanding achievements as judged by recognized experts | |
| Not met | Evidence does not demonstrate contributions of major significance to the field | |
| Not met | Record does not show sustained national or international acclaim or placement among small percentage at top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
