Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1ABusiness and managementIndividualDecided April 2025Remanded

Outcome: Remanded

APR172025_07B2203

AwardsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedJudgingClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed

Our summary

A corporate attorney with thirty years of business law experience in U.S.-France trade sought EB-1A classification. The AAO remanded because the Service Center Director failed to fully analyze claimed evidentiary criteria and incorrectly rejected post-filing evidence, depriving the petitioner of complete consideration.

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

Every criterion in the table was found met.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
AwardsClaimed, not analyzedDirector did not fully analyze award evidence; remanded for complete analysis of claimed awards criterion
High salaryClaimed, not analyzedCriterion claimed; Director incorrectly rejected prospective evidence dated after filing on remand
JudgingClaimed, not analyzedCriterion claimed but not fully analyzed by Director on remand
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedCriterion claimed but not fully analyzed by Director on remand
Published materialClaimed, not analyzedCriterion claimed but not fully analyzed by Director on remand
Final meritsNot reached / not discussedCase remanded before final merits analysis could be completed

A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.

Similar decisions

Decisions whose text is closest to this one.