Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AEducation and academiaIndividualDecided February 2026Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

FEB262026_01B2203

AwardsMetJudgingMetPublished materialMetScholarly articlesMetExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

A philosophy researcher claimed seven extraordinary ability criteria; SCOPS found four met. AAO, in final merits determination, dismissed the appeal, concluding the totality of evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that petitioner is among the very top of the field despite meeting initial criteria.

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 · SCOPS found petitioner met awards criterion; AAO did not disturb this finding.
  • Judging · SCOPS found petitioner met participation as judge criterion.
  • Published material · SCOPS found petitioner met published material about petitioner criterion.
  • Scholarly articles · SCOPS found petitioner met authorship of scholarly articles criterion.

What was missing

  • Final merits · Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among small percentage at very top of philosophy field.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
AwardsMetSCOPS found petitioner met awards criterion; AAO did not disturb this finding.
JudgingMetSCOPS found petitioner met participation as judge criterion.
Published materialMetSCOPS found petitioner met published material about petitioner criterion.
Scholarly articlesMetSCOPS found petitioner met authorship of scholarly articles criterion.
ExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed on appeal; dispositive final merits determination made.
MembershipClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed on appeal; SCOPS found three criteria met, appeal focused on final merits.
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed on appeal; dispositive final merits determination made.
Final meritsNot metPetitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among small percentage at very top of philosophy field.

A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.

Similar decisions

Decisions whose text is closest to this one.