EB-1ABusiness and managementIndividualDecided February 2021Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
FEB262021_05B2203
High salaryMetLeading or critical roleMetPublished materialMetJudgingNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Business development specialist self-petitioner claimed four criteria and extraordinary ability. AAO upheld finding of three criteria met but determined overall evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.
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
- High salary · Director found criterion satisfied; AAO did not disturb this finding.
- Leading or critical role · Director found criterion satisfied; AAO did not disturb this finding.
- Published material · Director found criterion satisfied; AAO did not disturb this finding.
What was missing
- Judging · Two judging instances seven years apart insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim or career of acclaimed work.
- Final merits · Limited media coverage since 2012 and judging activities insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier status.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 High salary | Met | Director found criterion satisfied; AAO did not disturb this finding. |
 Leading or critical role | Met | Director found criterion satisfied; AAO did not disturb this finding. |
 Published material | Met | Director found criterion satisfied; AAO did not disturb this finding. |
 Judging | Not met | Two judging instances seven years apart insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim or career of acclaimed work. |
 Final merits | Not met | Limited media coverage since 2012 and judging activities insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier status. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.