EB-1AOtherIndividualDecided 2011Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Dec072011_01B2203
JudgingNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Self-petitioner relied on work and degree from unaccredited institution AIU. The AAO affirmed denial because petitioner failed to meet three required evidentiary criteria: membership, judging, and original contributions. Reliance on unaccredited credentials demonstrated petitioner lacked recognized achievements and did not reach top percentage in field.
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
- Judging · Work at unaccredited institution AIU not recognized as evidence of judging in accredited field.
- Membership · Membership in associations based on employment, experience, or education does not constitute outstanding achievement required by regulation.
- Original contributions · Contributions limited to institutional, workshop, or community level; lack major significance in field.
- Scholarly articles · Petitioner failed to establish eligibility; director's findings not contested on appeal.
- Final merits · Reliance on unaccredited degree and institution indicates not in top percentage of field with sustained acclaim.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Not met | Work at unaccredited institution AIU not recognized as evidence of judging in accredited field. |
 Membership | Not met | Membership in associations based on employment, experience, or education does not constitute outstanding achievement required by regulation. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Contributions limited to institutional, workshop, or community level; lack major significance in field. |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Petitioner failed to establish eligibility; director's findings not contested on appeal. |
 Final merits | Not met | Reliance on unaccredited degree and institution indicates not in top percentage of field with sustained acclaim. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.