EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2006Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Feb222006_01B2203
Scholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metJudgingNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Research scientist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in sciences. Claimed awards, membership, published material, judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles. AAO found only scholarly articles criterion met; evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national acclaim or place among top percentile required for final merits step.
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
- Scholarly articles · Petitioner demonstrated publication record meeting criterion for scholarly articles.
What was missing
- Awards · Fellowships and examination scores insufficient; no major award from large pool of competitors.
- Judging · Routine peer review without evidence of unusual distinguishment or editorial position.
- Membership · No evidence that association requires outstanding achievement as essential condition.
- Original contributions · Patent and letters insufficient; contributions not of major significance as required.
- Published material · No evidence of petitioner's work publicly recognized in media or major publications.
- Final merits · Evidence shows talent but not sustained national acclaim or top percentage of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Scholarly articles | Met | Petitioner demonstrated publication record meeting criterion for scholarly articles. |
 Awards | Not met | Fellowships and examination scores insufficient; no major award from large pool of competitors. |
 Judging | Not met | Routine peer review without evidence of unusual distinguishment or editorial position. |
 Membership | Not met | No evidence that association requires outstanding achievement as essential condition. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Patent and letters insufficient; contributions not of major significance as required. |
 Published material | Not met | No evidence of petitioner's work publicly recognized in media or major publications. |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence shows talent but not sustained national acclaim or top percentage of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.