EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2017Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
AUG252017_01B2203
ExhibitionsNot metJudgingNot metLeading or critical roleNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Medical scientist sought extraordinary ability in sciences. Claimed six criteria but met none. AAO found judging role merely managerial, original contributions limited to employer, published articles not in major venues, and leadership role impact undemonstrated. Aggregate evidence insufficient for elite status.
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
- Exhibitions · Scientific conferences and proceedings are not artistic showcases; work not artistic in nature
- Judging · Director's finding reversed; incidental evaluation responsibilities in managerial position do not establish formal judging role
- Leading or critical role · Clinical trial leadership not shown to be critical to organization; no evidence of specific impact on overall organization
- Original contributions · Work limited to employer's clinical trials initiatives; impact not demonstrated beyond immediate colleagues or field as whole
- Published material · Article presentation at conferences not about petitioner; symposia not major trade publications or major media
- Final merits · Evidence does not demonstrate small percentage at top of field or sustained national or international acclaim
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Exhibitions | Not met | Scientific conferences and proceedings are not artistic showcases; work not artistic in nature |
 Judging | Not met | Director's finding reversed; incidental evaluation responsibilities in managerial position do not establish formal judging role |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Clinical trial leadership not shown to be critical to organization; no evidence of specific impact on overall organization |
 Original contributions | Not met | Work limited to employer's clinical trials initiatives; impact not demonstrated beyond immediate colleagues or field as whole |
 Published material | Not met | Article presentation at conferences not about petitioner; symposia not major trade publications or major media |
 Scholarly articles | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed separately; decision does not substantively address this as distinct criterion |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence does not demonstrate small percentage at top of field or sustained national or international acclaim |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.