EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
AUG042005_03B2203
AwardsNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A scientist claimed extraordinary ability through awards, membership, published material, and judging. The AAO rejected the awards and membership claims as insufficient, found no media attention, and concluded the petitioner failed to meet three criteria required for extraordinary ability classification.
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 · Certificates lack information on distribution numbers, selection criteria, and media coverage; no evidence of significant national stature
- Membership · Research fellowship eligibility based on temporary positions; cannot restrict field to exclude established researchers
- Published material · No evidence of sustained national or international media attention; citations addressed under separate criterion
- Final merits · Failed to meet at least three criteria; evidence does not establish sustained national or international acclaim at very top
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Certificates lack information on distribution numbers, selection criteria, and media coverage; no evidence of significant national stature |
 Membership | Not met | Research fellowship eligibility based on temporary positions; cannot restrict field to exclude established researchers |
 Published material | Not met | No evidence of sustained national or international media attention; citations addressed under separate criterion |
 Final merits | Not met | Failed to meet at least three criteria; evidence does not establish sustained national or international acclaim at very top |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.