Outcome: Dismissed
AUG062014_01B2203
Our summary
A cancer research scientist sought EB-1A classification based on extraordinary ability. The AAO affirmed denial, finding the petitioner claimed seven criteria but satisfied none. Fellowship and grant funding were insufficient to meet the awards criterion, and the petitioner failed to submit three types of qualifying evidence required for eligibility.
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 · Fellowship and grant funding do not constitute nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards.
- Final merits · Petitioner failed to satisfy three-criteria minimum; does not demonstrate small percentage at top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | Fellowship and grant funding do not constitute nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion claimed in regulations but not discussed in decision. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion claimed in regulations but not discussed in decision. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed beyond awards criterion discussion. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion claimed in regulations but not discussed in decision. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion claimed in regulations but not discussed in decision. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion claimed in regulations but not discussed in decision. | |
| Not met | Petitioner failed to satisfy three-criteria minimum; does not demonstrate small percentage at top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
