Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1ABusiness and managementIndividualDecided August 2024Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

AUG162024_03B2203

AwardsClaimed, not analyzedCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed

Our summary

Construction business manager sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner submitted untranslated materials without explaining which criteria addressed, failed timely RFE response, and provided only generic client appreciation letters. Appeal dismissed for failure to identify grounds.

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

Every criterion in the table was found met.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
AwardsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; petitioner failed to identify criteria or provide timely RFE response.
Commercial successClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; petitioner failed to identify criteria or provide timely RFE response.
ExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; petitioner failed to identify criteria or provide timely RFE response.
High salaryClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; petitioner failed to identify criteria or provide timely RFE response.
Leading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; petitioner failed to identify criteria or provide timely RFE response.
MembershipClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; petitioner failed to identify criteria or provide timely RFE response.
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; petitioner failed to identify criteria or provide timely RFE response.
Published materialClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; petitioner failed to identify criteria or provide timely RFE response.
Scholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; petitioner failed to identify criteria or provide timely RFE response.
Final meritsNot reached / not discussedTwo support letters from clients lacked specificity on projects and did not address criteria or demonstrate extraordinary ability.

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.