Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AComputer science and AIIndividualDecided February 2025Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

FEB032025_01B2203

JudgingMetLeading or critical roleMetScholarly articlesMetAwardsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

Software developer and entrepreneur claiming extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Met three initial criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and leading role. AAO dismissed appeal, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or that petitioner ranks among small percentage at field's top.

Official PDF

The official PDF link for this decision is being verified.

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 satisfied this criterion.
  • Leading or critical role · Director determined petitioner satisfied this criterion.
  • Scholarly articles · Director determined petitioner satisfied this criterion.

What was missing

  • Final merits · Petitioner failed to show sustained national or international acclaim or top percentage status.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingMetDirector determined petitioner satisfied this criterion.
Leading or critical roleMetDirector determined petitioner satisfied this criterion.
Scholarly articlesMetDirector determined petitioner satisfied this criterion.
AwardsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed in depth; proposed acquisition mentioned only for context.
High salaryClaimed, not analyzedNot mentioned as claimed or analyzed in decision.
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; decision focused on final merits determination.
Published materialClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; director focused on final merits rather than criteria.
Final meritsNot metPetitioner failed to show sustained national or international acclaim or top percentage status.

A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.

Similar decisions

Decisions whose text is closest to this one.