EB-1ABusiness and managementIndividualDecided February 2025Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
FEB032025_03B2203
Leading or critical roleMetPublished materialMetAwardsNot metJudgingNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metScholarly articlesNot metCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A business consultant and executive sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding she satisfied only two of ten criteria. Evidence relied on letters without corroboration, and prominence in the field was not demonstrated beyond an earlier period.
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
- Leading or critical role · Director found criterion met as general director of distributorship; AAO did not disturb
- Published material · Director found criterion met; AAO did not disturb
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award demonstrated
- Judging · No evidence of participation as judge of others' work
- Membership · Membership certificates lacked objective documentary evidence of association requirements
- Original contributions · Claimed but evidence did not establish major significance
- Scholarly articles · Claimed but not adequately demonstrated
- Final merits · Met only two criteria; strongest evidence from 2015-2018 with no showing of continued prominence
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Leading or critical role | Met | Director found criterion met as general director of distributorship; AAO did not disturb |
 Published material | Met | Director found criterion met; AAO did not disturb |
 Awards | Not met | No major internationally recognized award demonstrated |
 Judging | Not met | No evidence of participation as judge of others' work |
 Membership | Not met | Membership certificates lacked objective documentary evidence of association requirements |
 Original contributions | Not met | Claimed but evidence did not establish major significance |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Claimed but not adequately demonstrated |
 Commercial success | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or analyzed |
 Exhibitions | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or analyzed |
 High salary | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or analyzed |
 Final merits | Not met | Met only two criteria; strongest evidence from 2015-2018 with no showing of continued prominence |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.