Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AComputer science and AIIndividualDecided August 2025Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

AUG272025_03B2203

JudgingMetAwardsNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzed

Our summary

Chief Technology Officer seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability in science, technology, and education claimed seven criteria. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to meet three required criteria: awards not related to proposed endeavor, published material insufficient, and original contributions not of major significance.

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 · Petitioner served as judge of others' work in field.

What was missing

  • Awards · Award for teaching role not related to proposed CTO endeavor; lacks widespread recognition.
  • Original contributions · Evidence does not demonstrate original contributions of major significance or sustained national or international acclaim.
  • Published material · Articles about robotics team only briefly mention petitioner; do not focus on his work as CTO.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingMetPetitioner served as judge of others' work in field.
AwardsNot metAward for teaching role not related to proposed CTO endeavor; lacks widespread recognition.
Original contributionsNot metEvidence does not demonstrate original contributions of major significance or sustained national or international acclaim.
Published materialNot metArticles about robotics team only briefly mention petitioner; do not focus on his work as CTO.
High salaryClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but decision does not analyze this criterion.
Leading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but decision does not analyze this criterion substantively.
Scholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but decision does not analyze this criterion in detail.

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.