EB-1ALaw, policy, social scienceIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
APR272005_12B2203
AwardsNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Diplomat and physicist self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability. AAO rejected reliance on ambassador rank as award, found published materials insufficient, and concluded contributions lacked major significance. Evidence showed talent but not achievements distinguishing petitioner at top of field.
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 · Ambassador rank is not a major international recognized award comparable to Nobel Prize
- Original contributions · No contributions of major significance demonstrated in physics or international affairs
- Published material · Articles do not represent sustained national or international acclaim of petitioner
- Final merits · Failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim or position at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Ambassador rank is not a major international recognized award comparable to Nobel Prize |
 Original contributions | Not met | No contributions of major significance demonstrated in physics or international affairs |
 Published material | Not met | Articles do not represent sustained national or international acclaim of petitioner |
 Final merits | Not met | Failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim or position at top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.