EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided August 2024Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
AUG292024_01B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metHigh salaryNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Research scientist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed multiple criteria including scholarly articles and judging. AAO found she met only two of ten required criteria (scholarly articles and judging), falling short of three-criterion threshold. Final merits analysis confirmed insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim at top of field.
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 demonstrated participation as judge of work of others in her field.
- Scholarly articles · Petitioner met burden to demonstrate authorship of scholarly articles.
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award submitted or established.
- High salary · Director determined petitioner did not establish high salary in relation to others in her field.
- Leading or critical role · Postdoctoral fellow role described as trainee position; insufficient evidence that role was leading or critical without detailed supervisor statement.
- Membership · Director found petitioner did not establish membership in professional associations requiring outstanding achievements.
- Original contributions · Director concluded petitioner did not establish original contributions of major significance in her field.
- Final merits · Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that petitioner is among small percentage at very top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Petitioner demonstrated participation as judge of work of others in her field. |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Petitioner met burden to demonstrate authorship of scholarly articles. |
 Awards | Not met | No major internationally recognized award submitted or established. |
 High salary | Not met | Director determined petitioner did not establish high salary in relation to others in her field. |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Postdoctoral fellow role described as trainee position; insufficient evidence that role was leading or critical without detailed supervisor statement. |
 Membership | Not met | Director found petitioner did not establish membership in professional associations requiring outstanding achievements. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Director concluded petitioner did not establish original contributions of major significance in her field. |
 Final merits | Not met | Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that petitioner is among small percentage at very top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.