Outcome: Dismissed
Aug092007_02B2203
Our summary
Software engineer petitioner claimed four criteria for extraordinary ability classification. AAO found the awards criterion met but withdrawn published material and original contributions criteria as not meeting acclaim standard. Scholarly articles criterion also failed. Overall, evidence insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the 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
- Awards · Software product received industry excellence award; national recognition established
What was missing
- Original contributions · Contributions incremental; project lesser-known; no major significance to field
- Published material · Published material not primarily about petitioner; insufficient for criterion
- Scholarly articles · Paper discussed only incremental business process improvements; no major field impact
- Final merits · Evidence does not show sustained national or international acclaim at very top level
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Software product received industry excellence award; national recognition established | |
| Not met | Contributions incremental; project lesser-known; no major significance to field | |
| Not met | Published material not primarily about petitioner; insufficient for criterion | |
| Not met | Paper discussed only incremental business process improvements; no major field impact | |
| Not met | Evidence does not show sustained national or international acclaim at very top level |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
