EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2012Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Dec212012_04B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Medical researcher claiming extraordinary ability. Petitioner submitted evidence under six criteria; AAO found judging and scholarly articles met, but petitioner met only two of ten required types. In final merits analysis, insufficient evidence demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim or placement at very top of 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
- Judging · Director determined petitioner established this criterion; evidence supports finding
- Scholarly articles · AAO concluded petitioner met criterion for authorship of scholarly articles
What was missing
- Membership · Director denied; petitioner failed to meet plain language requirements of criterion
- Original contributions · Petitioner failed to demonstrate contributions of major significance in field
- Published material · Does not satisfy requirement for published material about petitioner, not by petitioner
- Final merits · Petitioner has not established sustained national or international acclaim
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director determined petitioner established this criterion; evidence supports finding |
 Scholarly articles | Met | AAO concluded petitioner met criterion for authorship of scholarly articles |
 Membership | Not met | Director denied; petitioner failed to meet plain language requirements of criterion |
 Original contributions | Not met | Petitioner failed to demonstrate contributions of major significance in field |
 Published material | Not met | Does not satisfy requirement for published material about petitioner, not by petitioner |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner has not established sustained national or international acclaim |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.