Outcome: Dismissed
FEB172026_02B2203
Our summary
Information security analyst IV with PhD sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO found beneficiary satisfied judging and authorship criteria but withdrew service center findings on leading role and high salary; did not meet threshold of three criteria; final merits determination not reached.
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 · Service center found satisfied; beneficiary served as program committee member at conferences
- Scholarly articles · Service center found satisfied; authorship criterion met
What was missing
- High salary · Base salary above competent analysts locally but insufficient comparative evidence; historical salary 2022-2024 not established against peers
- Leading or critical role · Lacked evidence of distinguished reputation for organization or division; credibility questioned; no showing of organization's reputation relative to others
- Membership · IEEE TPC and PC conference memberships do not meet requirement for association with outstanding achievement criteria
- Original contributions · Contributions to field not sufficiently established by petitioner
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Service center found satisfied; beneficiary served as program committee member at conferences | |
| Met | Service center found satisfied; authorship criterion met | |
| Not met | Base salary above competent analysts locally but insufficient comparative evidence; historical salary 2022-2024 not established against peers | |
| Not met | Lacked evidence of distinguished reputation for organization or division; credibility questioned; no showing of organization's reputation relative to others | |
| Not met | IEEE TPC and PC conference memberships do not meet requirement for association with outstanding achievement criteria | |
| Not met | Contributions to field not sufficiently established by petitioner | |
| Not reached / not discussed | Not reached; beneficiary failed to satisfy three initial evidentiary criteria threshold |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
