Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AMechanical and aerospace engineeringIndividualDecided February 2026Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

FEB272026_03B2203

AwardsNot metJudgingNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

Aerospace researcher claimed five evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. AAO found she met fewer than three criteria required and lacked sustained national or international acclaim at the top of her field, dismissing the appeal.

Official PDF

Official PDF ↗

Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.

No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.

What was missing

  • Awards · Award not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in field
  • Judging · Claimed but evidence does not support criterion requirements
  • Membership · Claimed but evidence does not support criterion requirements
  • Original contributions · Claimed but evidence does not support criterion requirements
  • Scholarly articles · Claimed but evidence does not support criterion requirements
  • Final merits · Record insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
AwardsNot metAward not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in field
JudgingNot metClaimed but evidence does not support criterion requirements
MembershipNot metClaimed but evidence does not support criterion requirements
Original contributionsNot metClaimed but evidence does not support criterion requirements
Scholarly articlesNot metClaimed but evidence does not support criterion requirements
Final meritsNot metRecord insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim

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.