EB-1AComputer science and AIIndividualDecided August 2026Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
AUG272026_01B2203
ExhibitionsMetLeading or critical roleMetAwardsNot metJudgingNot metOriginal contributionsNot metScholarly articlesNot metCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Information technology service delivery manager sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Appeal dismissed. Petitioner had invalid signature on Form I-290B. Substantively, although petitioner met two initial criteria, evidence demonstrated only local or organizational recognition, not the sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.
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
- Exhibitions · USCIS determined petitioner submitted comparable evidence to display at exhibitions or showcases.
- Leading or critical role · USCIS determined petitioner satisfied criterion for leading or critical roles for distinguished organizations.
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award established.
- Judging · Claimed but not met; not among the three criteria USCIS granted.
- Original contributions · Claimed as major significance but not met; not among criteria USCIS granted.
- Scholarly articles · Claimed comparable evidence but not met; not among criteria USCIS granted.
- Final merits · Even with two criteria met, petitioner lacks sustained national or international acclaim and recognition beyond employers and customers.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Exhibitions | Met | USCIS determined petitioner submitted comparable evidence to display at exhibitions or showcases. |
 Leading or critical role | Met | USCIS determined petitioner satisfied criterion for leading or critical roles for distinguished organizations. |
 Awards | Not met | No major internationally recognized award established. |
 Judging | Not met | Claimed but not met; not among the three criteria USCIS granted. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Claimed as major significance but not met; not among criteria USCIS granted. |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Claimed comparable evidence but not met; not among criteria USCIS granted. |
 Commercial success | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or discussed in decision. |
 High salary | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or discussed in decision. |
 Membership | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or discussed in decision. |
 Published material | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or discussed in decision. |
 Final merits | Not met | Even with two criteria met, petitioner lacks sustained national or international acclaim and recognition beyond employers and customers. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.