EB-1AFinance and economicsEmployerDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
FEB222005_01B2203
Scholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metHigh salaryNot metJudgingNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Senior quantitative analyst in economics claiming extraordinary ability through scholarly articles and professional role. AAO held one criterion met but overall failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim. Evidence shows talent but not top-tier distinction required; peer review routine and salary comparison lacking.
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
- Scholarly articles · Director concluded petitioner met this criterion; work described as cutting-edge by supporting letters
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award submitted or established
- High salary · No evidence salary compared with most experienced and renowned experts nationwide
- Judging · Peer review routine in field; no evidence of distinction from others or unusual volume
- Leading or critical role · Senior Quantitative Analyst role did not establish leading or critical role with sufficient evidence
- Final merits · Evidence shows talent but not that achievements set petitioner significantly above almost all others in field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Scholarly articles | Met | Director concluded petitioner met this criterion; work described as cutting-edge by supporting letters |
 Awards | Not met | No major internationally recognized award submitted or established |
 High salary | Not met | No evidence salary compared with most experienced and renowned experts nationwide |
 Judging | Not met | Peer review routine in field; no evidence of distinction from others or unusual volume |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Senior Quantitative Analyst role did not establish leading or critical role with sufficient evidence |
 Membership | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence shows talent but not that achievements set petitioner significantly above almost all others in field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.