EB-1AChemistry and materialsIndividualDecided February 2021Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
FEB262021_02B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A chemistry researcher self-petitioned for extraordinary ability. Claimed three criteria: judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles. AAO affirmed two criteria met (judging and scholarly articles) but found original contributions lacked major significance. No evidence of postdoctoral training demand or top-field recognition. Appeal dismissed.
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 · Director found criterion satisfied; peer review participation established.
- Scholarly articles · Director found criterion satisfied; authorship of scholarly articles established.
What was missing
- Original contributions · Petitioner made original contributions but failed to show major significance; usefulness not synonymous with major significance.
- Final merits · Record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or top percentage status in field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director found criterion satisfied; peer review participation established. |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Director found criterion satisfied; authorship of scholarly articles established. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Petitioner made original contributions but failed to show major significance; usefulness not synonymous with major significance. |
 Final merits | Not met | Record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or top percentage status in field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.