EB-1AHealthcare, clinicalIndividualDecided February 2022Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
FEB242022_01B2203
AwardsMetJudgingMetPublished materialMetScholarly articlesMetFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Orthopaedic surgeon sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner met four evidentiary criteria but AAO held he lacked sustained national or international acclaim necessary for the classification, finding awards were for financial assistance, media coverage was minimal and ended, judging involved only medical students, and publication record insufficient.
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 · Director determined petitioner satisfied criterion; AAO notes scholarships but discounts their significance for extraordinary ability showing.
- Judging · Director determined petitioner satisfied criterion; AAO notes evaluating first-year medical students does not demonstrate extraordinary ability.
- Published material · Director determined petitioner satisfied criterion; AAO notes minimal media exposure insufficient for sustained acclaim.
- Scholarly articles · Director determined petitioner satisfied criterion; AAO finds fourteen articles in five years insufficient for career of acclaimed work.
What was missing
- Final merits · Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and placement among small percentage at top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Met | Director determined petitioner satisfied criterion; AAO notes scholarships but discounts their significance for extraordinary ability showing. |
 Judging | Met | Director determined petitioner satisfied criterion; AAO notes evaluating first-year medical students does not demonstrate extraordinary ability. |
 Published material | Met | Director determined petitioner satisfied criterion; AAO notes minimal media exposure insufficient for sustained acclaim. |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Director determined petitioner satisfied criterion; AAO finds fourteen articles in five years insufficient for career of acclaimed work. |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and placement among small percentage at top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.