Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

APR272005_11B2203

AwardsNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

A poet seeks EB-1A as an alien of extraordinary ability in the arts. The petitioner claimed awards, membership, published material, and scholarly articles. The AAO affirmed dismissal because the petitioner failed to establish any criterion and showed only talent, not sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level.

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

  • Awards · Awards claimed not established as nationally or internationally recognized; significance not demonstrated.
  • Membership · Positions within associations are not memberships and do not satisfy this criterion.
  • Published material · References from friends as good sources but do not establish national or international acclaim characteristics.
  • Scholarly articles · Theses not shown to be published; does not establish sustained acclaim or top-level poet status.
  • Final merits · Petitioner shows talent but achievements do not place him among very few at the top of poetry field.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
AwardsNot metAwards claimed not established as nationally or internationally recognized; significance not demonstrated.
MembershipNot metPositions within associations are not memberships and do not satisfy this criterion.
Published materialNot metReferences from friends as good sources but do not establish national or international acclaim characteristics.
Scholarly articlesNot metTheses not shown to be published; does not establish sustained acclaim or top-level poet status.
Final meritsNot metPetitioner shows talent but achievements do not place him among very few at the top of poetry field.

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.