EB-1AAgriculture and foodIndividualDecided 2013Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
FEB272013_03B2203
JudgingMetAwardsNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed
Our summary
A crop researcher filed an EB-1A petition claiming extraordinary ability. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner satisfied only one criterion (judging) when three were required, and did not establish awards, published material about him, or original contributions of major significance.
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 · Petitioner served on editorial board and as peer reviewer and technical editor.
What was missing
- Awards · Awards not demonstrated as nationally or internationally recognized beyond presenting organizations.
- Original contributions · No evidence results were applied in breeding programs or heavily cited by independent researchers.
- Published material · Submitted articles do not discuss petitioner's standing; do not meet criterion requirements.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Petitioner served on editorial board and as peer reviewer and technical editor. |
 Awards | Not met | Awards not demonstrated as nationally or internationally recognized beyond presenting organizations. |
 Original contributions | Not met | No evidence results were applied in breeding programs or heavily cited by independent researchers. |
 Published material | Not met | Submitted articles do not discuss petitioner's standing; do not meet criterion requirements. |
 Final merits | Not reached / not discussed | Petitioner met only one criterion; three required; final merits not reached. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.