EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided April 2020Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
APR232020_14B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Molecular biochemist and postdoctoral researcher sought extraordinary ability classification. Met two criteria (judging, scholarly articles). Original contributions criterion rejected because supporting letters lacked specificity on field impact and citation metrics alone insufficient. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet three-criterion threshold.
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 · Director's finding that criterion was met was not disturbed on appeal
- Scholarly articles · Petitioner authored articles in Science and Molecular Cell; criterion met as agreed by Director
What was missing
- Original contributions · Letters lacked specificity on field impact; highly cited publications alone insufficient without major significance demonstration
- Final merits · Only two criteria met; work did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director's finding that criterion was met was not disturbed on appeal |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Petitioner authored articles in Science and Molecular Cell; criterion met as agreed by Director |
 Original contributions | Not met | Letters lacked specificity on field impact; highly cited publications alone insufficient without major significance demonstration |
 Final merits | Not met | Only two criteria met; work did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.