Outcome: Dismissed
JUL142025_02B2203
Our summary
Mobile technology consultant appealed denial of EB-1A petition. Although petitioner claimed four criteria met, AAO found published material and leading role criteria not satisfied. Petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim and failed to establish extraordinary ability standard.
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
- High salary · Evidence does not provide comparative salary data for similarly situated individuals in field.
- Leading or critical role · Promoted to Corporate Operations Officer but employer lacks distinguished reputation in record.
- Published material · Articles from Vanguard and Guardian websites; insufficient circulation data or evidence of major media status.
- Final merits · Beneficiary did not meet three criteria; evidence lacks sustained national or international acclaim.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | Evidence does not provide comparative salary data for similarly situated individuals in field. | |
| Not met | Promoted to Corporate Operations Officer but employer lacks distinguished reputation in record. | |
| Not met | Articles from Vanguard and Guardian websites; insufficient circulation data or evidence of major media status. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed; decision does not analyze this criterion. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed; decision does not analyze this criterion. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed; decision does not analyze this criterion. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed; decision does not analyze this criterion. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed; decision does not analyze this criterion. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed; decision does not analyze this criterion. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed; decision does not analyze this criterion. | |
| Not met | Beneficiary did not meet three criteria; evidence lacks sustained national or international acclaim. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
