Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AFinance and economicsIndividualDecided August 2025Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

AUG052025_01B2203

JudgingMetMembershipMetPublished materialMetExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

An economist sought EB-1A classification for extraordinary ability. The AAO found he met three evidentiary criteria: association membership, published material, and judging. However, on final merits determination, the record lacked evidence of published scholarly articles, government implementation of research, or sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability. Appeal dismissed.

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 · Served as judge of others' work in economics; job responsibility does not preclude meeting criterion
  • Membership · Honorary membership in Association of Georgian Economists requires special professional achievements and highest stature
  • Published material · Articles and television episodes about petitioner's work published in major media and professional publications

What was missing

  • Final merits · Meets three evidentiary criteria but no evidence of articles published, research implemented, or sustained national or international acclaim

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingMetServed as judge of others' work in economics; job responsibility does not preclude meeting criterion
MembershipMetHonorary membership in Association of Georgian Economists requires special professional achievements and highest stature
Published materialMetArticles and television episodes about petitioner's work published in major media and professional publications
ExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed comparable evidence but not analyzed due to satisfaction of three criteria
Leading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed due to satisfaction of three criteria
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed due to satisfaction of three criteria
Scholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed due to satisfaction of three criteria
Final meritsNot metMeets three evidentiary criteria but no evidence of articles published, research implemented, or sustained national or international acclaim

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.