EB-1AComputer science and AIIndividualDecided April 2026Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
APR142026_01B2203
High salaryMetJudgingMetLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Software development engineer in test claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A, citing five criteria. AAO found he met judging and high salary criteria but abandoned other claims on appeal. Two criteria insufficient; record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.
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
- High salary · Petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence meeting plain language requirement for high remuneration
- Judging · Petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence of judging work meeting plain language of regulation
What was missing
- Leading or critical role · Insufficient evidence that petitioner performed critical role beyond ordinary impact on organization
- Membership · Petitioner abandoned this issue on appeal without contesting SCOPS findings
- Original contributions · Petitioner abandoned this issue on appeal without contesting SCOPS findings
- Final merits · Two criteria met insufficient; petitioner has not shown sustained national or international acclaim at top tier
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 High salary | Met | Petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence meeting plain language requirement for high remuneration |
 Judging | Met | Petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence of judging work meeting plain language of regulation |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Insufficient evidence that petitioner performed critical role beyond ordinary impact on organization |
 Membership | Not met | Petitioner abandoned this issue on appeal without contesting SCOPS findings |
 Original contributions | Not met | Petitioner abandoned this issue on appeal without contesting SCOPS findings |
 Final merits | Not met | Two criteria met insufficient; petitioner has not shown sustained national or international acclaim at top tier |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.