EB-1AComputer science and AIIndividualDecided August 2022Remanded
Outcome: Remanded
AUG042022_01B2203
Leading or critical roleMetOriginal contributionsMetAwardsNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed
Our summary
Chief technology officer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director denied; AAO found director failed to evaluate petitioner's claimed scholarly articles criterion. AAO remanded for director to address this criterion and if satisfied conduct final merits analysis.
Official PDF
The official PDF link for this decision is being verified.
Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
What the AAO accepted
- Leading or critical role · Director and AAO agree criterion satisfied
- Original contributions · Director and AAO agree criterion satisfied
What was missing
- Awards · Awards granted to employer not petitioner; petitioner did not show he was acknowledged recipient
- Published material · Articles submitted do not mention petitioner; one article published after petition filing cannot establish timely eligibility
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Leading or critical role | Met | Director and AAO agree criterion satisfied |
 Original contributions | Met | Director and AAO agree criterion satisfied |
 Awards | Not met | Awards granted to employer not petitioner; petitioner did not show he was acknowledged recipient |
 Published material | Not met | Articles submitted do not mention petitioner; one article published after petition filing cannot establish timely eligibility |
 Scholarly articles | Claimed, not analyzed | Petitioner claimed criterion and submitted evidence but director did not acknowledge or evaluate this fifth criterion |
 Final merits | Not reached / not discussed | Not reached; remanded for director to evaluate claimed scholarly articles criterion and conduct final merits analysis if third criterion met |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.