EB-1AComputer science and AIIndividualDecided 2016Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
DEC212016_01B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metLeading or critical roleNot metOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Computer scientist petitioner claimed extraordinary ability, meeting judging and scholarly articles criteria. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner satisfied only two criteria and failed to establish original contributions of major significance or leading role, not reaching three-criterion threshold for final merits consideration.
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 · Reviewed articles for scientific journals; Director and AAO concurred criterion met
- Scholarly articles · Authored scholarly articles in professional publications; Director found criterion satisfied
What was missing
- Awards · Fellowship, grants, and award not shown nationally or internationally recognized for excellence
- Leading or critical role · Post-doctoral position and reference letters do not establish leading role for distinguished organization
- Original contributions · Citations insufficient; presentations lack evidence of significant impact; future significance speculative
- Final merits · Did not satisfy three-criterion threshold; final merits analysis not required
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Reviewed articles for scientific journals; Director and AAO concurred criterion met |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Authored scholarly articles in professional publications; Director found criterion satisfied |
 Awards | Not met | Fellowship, grants, and award not shown nationally or internationally recognized for excellence |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Post-doctoral position and reference letters do not establish leading role for distinguished organization |
 Original contributions | Not met | Citations insufficient; presentations lack evidence of significant impact; future significance speculative |
 Final merits | Not met | Did not satisfy three-criterion threshold; final merits analysis not required |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.