EB-1AMechanical and aerospace engineeringIndividualDecided August 2025Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
AUG282025_01B2203
High salaryMetMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed
Our summary
A director of product compliance at a school bus manufacturer sought extraordinary ability classification. The service center found only a high salary criterion met, and he claimed five more on appeal. The AAO found memberships, published material, contributions and scholarly articles unmet, leaving fewer than three criteria, and dismissed the appeal.
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
- High salary · Service center found the high salary criterion satisfied and the decision left that finding undisturbed.
What was missing
- Membership · Petitioner was not shown to be an individual member; his employer was the association member.
- Original contributions · Approach was not shown to be implemented beyond his employer or of major significance in the field.
- Published material · The article was not about the petitioner himself, only about his employer or organization.
- Scholarly articles · Short article lacked scholarly features and was not shown to be written for learned persons.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 High salary | Met | Service center found the high salary criterion satisfied and the decision left that finding undisturbed. |
 Membership | Not met | Petitioner was not shown to be an individual member; his employer was the association member. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Approach was not shown to be implemented beyond his employer or of major significance in the field. |
 Published material | Not met | The article was not about the petitioner himself, only about his employer or organization. |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Short article lacked scholarly features and was not shown to be written for learned persons. |
 Final merits | Not reached / not discussed | Remarks on acclaim made only as alternative basis; no formal final merits step after threshold failed. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.