EB-1AComputer science and AIEmployerDecided 2019Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
FEB042019_02B2203
JudgingMetLeading or critical roleNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Chief technology officer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO found only one criterion clearly met (judging) and concluded record lacked sustained national or international acclaim or placement at top of field, dismissing appeal.
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 · Evidence of participation as judge of others' work in field
What was missing
- Leading or critical role · No showing that organizations had distinguished reputation; Director's finding withdrawn
- Original contributions · Contributions lack major significance; usage numbers unexplained; letters use hyperbolic language without specifics
- Published material · Articles not about petitioner; do not satisfy regulatory criterion
- Final merits · Fewer than three criteria met; extraordinary ability standard not demonstrated; petition seeks highly restrictive classification
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Evidence of participation as judge of others' work in field |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | No showing that organizations had distinguished reputation; Director's finding withdrawn |
 Original contributions | Not met | Contributions lack major significance; usage numbers unexplained; letters use hyperbolic language without specifics |
 Published material | Not met | Articles not about petitioner; do not satisfy regulatory criterion |
 Final merits | Not met | Fewer than three criteria met; extraordinary ability standard not demonstrated; petition seeks highly restrictive classification |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.