Outcome: Dismissed
FEB162023_02B2203
Our summary
Product manager with doctorate in robotics and AI sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO found three criteria met (awards, scholarly articles, leading role) but final merits analysis showed achievements insufficient for sustained national/international acclaim at top of field level.
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
- Awards · Two nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for innovative digital projects
- Leading or critical role · Beneficiary held leading or critical role for distinguished organization
- Scholarly articles · Beneficiary authored scholarly articles in IEEE professional publications
What was missing
- Membership · Petitioner did not assert beneficiary was member of association requiring outstanding achievements
- Original contributions · Record did not establish original contributions of major significance to field
- Published material · Record did not establish published material about beneficiary in professional or major media
- Final merits · Beneficiary's achievements did not rise to level of sustained acclaim or career of acclaimed work
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Two nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for innovative digital projects | |
| Met | Beneficiary held leading or critical role for distinguished organization | |
| Met | Beneficiary authored scholarly articles in IEEE professional publications | |
| Not met | Petitioner did not assert beneficiary was member of association requiring outstanding achievements | |
| Not met | Record did not establish original contributions of major significance to field | |
| Not met | Record did not establish published material about beneficiary in professional or major media | |
| Not met | Beneficiary's achievements did not rise to level of sustained acclaim or career of acclaimed work |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
