EB-1AMarketing, media, communicationsIndividualDecided February 2021Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
FEB262021_08B2203
JudgingMetAwardsNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesNot metCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed
Our summary
A journalist and sub-editor sought extraordinary ability classification, initially claiming all ten criteria. The director found only judging met. The AAO dismissed the appeal, concluding the petitioner satisfied only one criterion because awards, memberships, media coverage, articles and role were not adequately shown, and sustained acclaim was not demonstrated.
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 this criterion satisfied and the AAO agreed that she judged the work of others.
What was missing
- Awards · Awards not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized; no media coverage of them.
- Leading or critical role · Publisher's reputation shown, but her leading or critical role was not demonstrated.
- Membership · Neither organization shown to require outstanding achievements of its members.
- Published material · Articles were authored by her rather than about her; outlets not shown to be major media.
- Scholarly articles · Submitted articles she wrote or edited were not scholarly.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director found this criterion satisfied and the AAO agreed that she judged the work of others. |
 Awards | Not met | Awards not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized; no media coverage of them. |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Publisher's reputation shown, but her leading or critical role was not demonstrated. |
 Membership | Not met | Neither organization shown to require outstanding achievements of its members. |
 Published material | Not met | Articles were authored by her rather than about her; outlets not shown to be major media. |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Submitted articles she wrote or edited were not scholarly. |
 Commercial success | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in the decision as condensed. |
 Exhibitions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner did not contest the director's conclusion, so the issue was deemed abandoned. |
 High salary | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in the decision as condensed. |
 Original contributions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in the decision as condensed; petitioner asserted it on appeal. |
 Final merits | Not reached / not discussed | Not reached because three criteria were not satisfied, though sustained acclaim was also noted as lacking. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.