EB-1AAgriculture and foodIndividualDecided August 2025Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
AUG292025_03B2203
Scholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metJudgingNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed
Our summary
Animal science postdoctoral researcher claimed six criteria for extraordinary ability. Service center found only scholarly articles criterion met. AAO affirmed that petitioner satisfied only one criterion, not the required three, and dismissed appeal. Work lacks 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
- Scholarly articles · Service center determined petitioner met this criterion; decision did not disturb finding
What was missing
- Awards · No major, internationally recognized award established
- Judging · Confidentiality agreement lacks letters from editors or evidence of peer review service
- Leading or critical role · Roles as assessor do not show leading or critical role at distinguished organization
- Membership · Student membership does not require outstanding achievements as judged by experts
- Original contributions · Publication record, citations, and letters do not establish contributions of major significance
- Published material · One co-authored article insufficient; does not demonstrate major significance
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Scholarly articles | Met | Service center determined petitioner met this criterion; decision did not disturb finding |
 Awards | Not met | No major, internationally recognized award established |
 Judging | Not met | Confidentiality agreement lacks letters from editors or evidence of peer review service |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Roles as assessor do not show leading or critical role at distinguished organization |
 Membership | Not met | Student membership does not require outstanding achievements as judged by experts |
 Original contributions | Not met | Publication record, citations, and letters do not establish contributions of major significance |
 Published material | Not met | One co-authored article insufficient; does not demonstrate major significance |
 Final merits | Not reached / not discussed | Threshold initial evidence requirement not met; final merits determination not conducted |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.