Outcome: Dismissed
AUG112020_01B2203
Our summary
A mechanical engineer claimed extraordinary ability through contributions to aeronautical research and design. The AAO found judging and original contribution criteria met but rejected the claim that contributions had major significance. The petitioner failed the three-criterion threshold and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.
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 · Reviewed articles for American Society of Mechanical Engineers journals
- Original contributions · Published research and patents demonstrate original contributions
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award received or established
- Scholarly articles · Original contributions not of major significance; work cited but no remarkable field impact demonstrated
- Final merits · Failed to meet three-criterion threshold; no sustained national or international acclaim demonstrated
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Reviewed articles for American Society of Mechanical Engineers journals | |
| Met | Published research and patents demonstrate original contributions | |
| Not met | No major internationally recognized award received or established | |
| Not met | Original contributions not of major significance; work cited but no remarkable field impact demonstrated | |
| Not met | Failed to meet three-criterion threshold; no sustained national or international acclaim demonstrated |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
