Outcome: Dismissed
FEB272024_01B2203
Our summary
Safety and risk management expert claiming extraordinary ability. Petitioner claimed five criteria; AAO found only two met (judging and scholarly articles). Appeal dismissed because petitioner failed to establish three of ten required criteria and lacked national or international acclaim.
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 · AAO disagreed with Director and found evidence sufficient
- Scholarly articles · Director found petitioner met this criterion
What was missing
- Leading or critical role · Insufficient evidence that division had distinguished reputation
- Original contributions · Citations insufficient to show major significance in field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | AAO disagreed with Director and found evidence sufficient | |
| Met | Director found petitioner met this criterion | |
| Not met | Insufficient evidence that division had distinguished reputation | |
| Not met | Citations insufficient to show major significance in field | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision | |
| Not reached / not discussed | Not reached because petitioner did not meet three criteria |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
