EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
APR142005_05B2203
AwardsNot metHigh salaryNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A research scientist claims EB-1A extraordinary ability in the sciences. The petitioner asserted awards, membership, publications, original contributions, scholarly articles, leading role, and salary criteria. The AAO affirmed denial because none demonstrated the sustained national or international acclaim required to show she reached the very top of her field.
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 · Scholarships and fellowship do not demonstrate national or international recognition as established researcher.
- High salary · No comparable salary data for research scientists in field provided.
- Leading or critical role · Letters from colleagues do not establish leading or critical role for research center.
- Membership · Membership not earned by virtue of outstanding achievements in research.
- Original contributions · Letters do not show original scientific contributions of major significance in field.
- Published material · Published articles by petitioner do not satisfy criterion; review too old for sustained acclaim.
- Scholarly articles · Citations insufficient; does not demonstrate independent expert citations or sustained acclaim.
- Final merits · Highly skilled researcher but failed to demonstrate already risen to very top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Scholarships and fellowship do not demonstrate national or international recognition as established researcher. |
 High salary | Not met | No comparable salary data for research scientists in field provided. |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Letters from colleagues do not establish leading or critical role for research center. |
 Membership | Not met | Membership not earned by virtue of outstanding achievements in research. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Letters do not show original scientific contributions of major significance in field. |
 Published material | Not met | Published articles by petitioner do not satisfy criterion; review too old for sustained acclaim. |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Citations insufficient; does not demonstrate independent expert citations or sustained acclaim. |
 Final merits | Not met | Highly skilled researcher but failed to demonstrate already risen to very top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.