Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AEducation and academiaIndividualDecided April 2026Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

APR282026_01B2203

JudgingMetPublished materialMetHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed

Our summary

Psychologist and psychology school founder in Kazakhstan claims extraordinary ability. Met published material criterion and meets judging criterion on appeal review. Failed to demonstrate original contributions of major significance or sufficient evidence on other criteria. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner did not satisfy three initial evidentiary criteria 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 · AAO withdrew SCOPS determination and concluded petitioner meets this criterion based on evaluator participation
  • Published material · Service center determined criterion met; petitioner did not contest on appeal

What was missing

Every criterion in the table was found met.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingMetAAO withdrew SCOPS determination and concluded petitioner meets this criterion based on evaluator participation
Published materialMetService center determined criterion met; petitioner did not contest on appeal
High salaryClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; petitioner contested SCOPS but record lacks sufficient documentation
Leading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedNot claimed or discussed on appeal; petitioner waived this issue
MembershipClaimed, not analyzedNot claimed or discussed on appeal; petitioner waived this issue
Scholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedNot claimed or discussed on appeal; petitioner waived this issue
Final meritsNot reached / not discussedNot reached; petitioner did not meet initial evidence requirements threshold

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.