EB-1AComputer science and AIIndividualDecided 2020Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
APR232020_15B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A research scientist in machine learning and artificial intelligence self-petitioned for extraordinary ability. He met judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed to establish original contributions of major significance. The AAO dismissed, finding no evidence of sustained acclaim or top 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 peer reviewed manuscripts for conferences and professional journals.
- Scholarly articles · Petitioner authored journal articles and more than 20 conference papers.
What was missing
- Original contributions · Contributions not shown to be of major significance; citations and finalist recognition insufficient.
- Final merits · No showing of sustained national or international acclaim or top field status.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Petitioner peer reviewed manuscripts for conferences and professional journals. |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Petitioner authored journal articles and more than 20 conference papers. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Contributions not shown to be of major significance; citations and finalist recognition insufficient. |
 Final merits | Not met | No showing of sustained national or international acclaim or top field status. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.