EB-1AOtherIndividualDecided 2014Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
DEC292014_01B2203
Original contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Self-petitioner claimed three criteria: published material, original contributions, and scholarly articles. AAO found petitioner failed to meet initial three-criteria threshold. Patent submission insufficient to show major significance; regulation requires multiple contributions. Overall evidence does not demonstrate extraordinary ability.
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
- Original contributions · Patent alone does not demonstrate original contributions of major significance; plural required by regulation
- Published material · Patent application does not constitute published material about petitioner in professional publications
- Final merits · Aggregate evidence does not support level of expertise required for extraordinary ability classification
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Original contributions | Not met | Patent alone does not demonstrate original contributions of major significance; plural required by regulation |
 Published material | Not met | Patent application does not constitute published material about petitioner in professional publications |
 Scholarly articles | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion claimed on appeal but AAO declined to address given failure on other counts |
 Final merits | Not met | Aggregate evidence does not support level of expertise required for extraordinary ability classification |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.