EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided 2019Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
APR172019_02B2203
JudgingMetLeading or critical roleMetOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Spa design and wellness professional sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner met only two criteria (judging, leading role), falling short of three-criterion requirement, and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier field status.
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 · Petitioner demonstrated judging work for publications or professional organizations in spa design and wellness field.
- Leading or critical role · Petitioner held leading or critical role for organizations having distinguished reputation in wellness industry.
What was missing
- Original contributions · Petitioner failed to establish original contributions of major significance; wide implementation, remarkable impact, or field influence not demonstrated.
- Published material · Articles submitted were not about petitioner; media outlets lacked demonstration of major trade publication or major media status.
- Final merits · Petitioner established only two criteria; failed to meet three-criterion threshold and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Petitioner demonstrated judging work for publications or professional organizations in spa design and wellness field. |
 Leading or critical role | Met | Petitioner held leading or critical role for organizations having distinguished reputation in wellness industry. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Petitioner failed to establish original contributions of major significance; wide implementation, remarkable impact, or field influence not demonstrated. |
 Published material | Not met | Articles submitted were not about petitioner; media outlets lacked demonstration of major trade publication or major media status. |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner established only two criteria; failed to meet three-criterion threshold and lacked sustained national or international acclaim. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.