EB-1ALife sciences and medicineEmployerDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
AUG102005_01B2203
JudgingMetPublished materialMetAwardsNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A scientist in water resources and environmental management claimed extraordinary ability through multiple criteria. The AAO found peer review and conference presentations met two criteria but rejected the petition because the evidence overall did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim placing the petitioner at the very top of the field.
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 · Peer review for Water Resources Research and NSF panel service sufficient
- Published material · Academic conference presentations fulfill criterion based on immigration authority
What was missing
- Awards · Academic scholarships and fellowships are for students, not established scientists
- Membership · No evidence that membership requires outstanding achievement
- Original contributions · Recommendation letters alone do not establish major contributions; lack independent preexisting evidence
- Scholarly articles · Minimal publication and citation record does not reflect sustained acclaim
- Final merits · Record does not establish sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Peer review for Water Resources Research and NSF panel service sufficient |
 Published material | Met | Academic conference presentations fulfill criterion based on immigration authority |
 Awards | Not met | Academic scholarships and fellowships are for students, not established scientists |
 Membership | Not met | No evidence that membership requires outstanding achievement |
 Original contributions | Not met | Recommendation letters alone do not establish major contributions; lack independent preexisting evidence |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Minimal publication and citation record does not reflect sustained acclaim |
 Final merits | Not met | Record does not establish sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.