Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AEntrepreneurshipIndividualDecided February 2024Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

FEB152024_01B2203

AwardsNot metOriginal contributionsNot metScholarly articlesNot metHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed

Our summary

An entrepreneur, city councilor and philanthropist sought EB-1A classification, claiming six evidentiary criteria. The AAO found the awards, original contributions and scholarly articles criteria unmet, reserved two others, and concluded fewer than three criteria were satisfied. It dismissed the appeal without a formal final merits analysis.

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

  • Awards · Both awards came from city councils, with no showing of national or international recognition.
  • Original contributions · Drafting a resolution creating a commission was not shown to be original or of major significance.
  • Scholarly articles · The book and related material were not shown to be scholarly articles in qualifying publications.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
AwardsNot metBoth awards came from city councils, with no showing of national or international recognition.
Original contributionsNot metDrafting a resolution creating a commission was not shown to be original or of major significance.
Scholarly articlesNot metThe book and related material were not shown to be scholarly articles in qualifying publications.
High salaryClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; appellate arguments reserved because the three-criterion threshold was not met.
Published materialClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; appellate arguments reserved because the three-criterion threshold was not met.
Final meritsNot reached / not discussedNo formal final merits determination was made, though the record in aggregate was noted as insufficient.

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.