EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUL152005_01B2203
AwardsNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A scientist studying TRK proteins and protein folding sought EB-1A classification. She claimed multiple regulatory criteria based on academic honors, publications, and research contributions. The AAO found her academic honors insufficient, publications lacked evidence of widespread citation outside support letters, and her work, though valuable, did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level required for extraordinary ability.
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 · Academic honors granted by individual institutions to postdoctoral fellows do not reflect sustained national or international acclaim.
- Membership · Director correctly determined petitioner did not meet this criterion.
- Published material · Record devoid of evidence that publications were widely cited or recognized outside of solicited support letters as major contributions.
- Scholarly articles · Record lacks evidence of widespread citation or recognition of articles as major contributions reflecting sustained acclaim.
- Final merits · Evidence shows valuable contributions but not sustained national or international acclaim placing petitioner at very top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Academic honors granted by individual institutions to postdoctoral fellows do not reflect sustained national or international acclaim. |
 Membership | Not met | Director correctly determined petitioner did not meet this criterion. |
 Published material | Not met | Record devoid of evidence that publications were widely cited or recognized outside of solicited support letters as major contributions. |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Record lacks evidence of widespread citation or recognition of articles as major contributions reflecting sustained acclaim. |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence shows valuable contributions but not sustained national or international acclaim placing petitioner at very top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.