EB-1AHealthcare, clinicalIndividualDecided 2017Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JAN232017_01B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetLeading or critical roleNot metOriginal contributionsNot metAwardsClaimed, not analyzedExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Internal medicine physician claimed extraordinary ability in sciences. Met two criteria (judging and scholarly articles) but failed to meet three-criterion threshold. Original contributions lacked major significance; leading role not demonstrated at distinguished organization. Aggregate review found insufficient expertise.
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 · Served on peer review committee evaluating clinical practices and processes at medical institution.
- Scholarly articles · Authored scholarly article published in professional medical publication.
What was missing
- Leading or critical role · Position as vice chair lacked evidence of distinguished hierarchy impact; letters did not show critical role; organization lacked distinguished reputation.
- Original contributions · Citation count insufficient; publications without major significance do not satisfy criterion; proposal lacked final determination.
- Final merits · Only two criteria met; three required. AAO reviewed record in aggregate finding insufficient expertise for extraordinary ability.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Served on peer review committee evaluating clinical practices and processes at medical institution. |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Authored scholarly article published in professional medical publication. |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Position as vice chair lacked evidence of distinguished hierarchy impact; letters did not show critical role; organization lacked distinguished reputation. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Citation count insufficient; publications without major significance do not satisfy criterion; proposal lacked final determination. |
 Awards | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed in original petition but petitioner did not pursue on appeal; not addressed in final decision. |
 Exhibitions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed in original petition but petitioner did not pursue on appeal; not addressed in final decision. |
 High salary | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed in original petition but petitioner did not pursue on appeal; not addressed in final decision. |
 Membership | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed in original petition but petitioner did not pursue on appeal; not addressed in final decision. |
 Final merits | Not met | Only two criteria met; three required. AAO reviewed record in aggregate finding insufficient expertise for extraordinary ability. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.