EB-1AEducation and academiaIndividualDecided 2006Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Apr112006_01B2203
AwardsNot metJudgingNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A self-represented scholar in Buddhist and philosophical studies sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming awards, memberships, published material, judging and a leading role. The AAO agreed with the director that none of five criteria was met, since awards and memberships were not selective and the publication was self-founded, so acclaim was not shown.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.
What was missing
- Awards · Student scholarship and age-limited contest prizes lacked recognition beyond presenting organization and did not show standing at the top of the field.
- Judging · Editing and reviewing for an internet publication he founded did not show acclaim or an established reputation.
- Leading or critical role · No showing of a leading or critical role for a distinguished organization.
- Membership · Two recently formed associations lacked proof of requiring outstanding achievement or evaluation by national or international experts for admission.
- Published material · Radio broadcasts and website listings were not shown to be published material about him in major media with substantial audience.
- Final merits · Evidence did not place him among the small percentage at the very top with sustained acclaim.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Student scholarship and age-limited contest prizes lacked recognition beyond presenting organization and did not show standing at the top of the field. |
 Judging | Not met | Editing and reviewing for an internet publication he founded did not show acclaim or an established reputation. |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | No showing of a leading or critical role for a distinguished organization. |
 Membership | Not met | Two recently formed associations lacked proof of requiring outstanding achievement or evaluation by national or international experts for admission. |
 Published material | Not met | Radio broadcasts and website listings were not shown to be published material about him in major media with substantial audience. |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence did not place him among the small percentage at the very top with sustained acclaim. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.