EB-1AEducation and academiaIndividualDecided 2014Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUL162014_01B2203
AwardsNot metOriginal contributionsNot metCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Self-petitioner, academic researcher, sought EB-1A classification claiming awards and original contributions. AAO dismissed appeal, finding scholarships were not nationally recognized awards, impact claims lacked field-wide evidence, petitioner met only two criteria, and failed to establish extraordinary ability at highest level.
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 · Scholarships and grants not documented as national or internationally recognized awards; employment is separate criterion
- Original contributions · Letters did not explain impact on field; invitations to review journals do not meet this criterion; article inclusion in books lacked demonstrated importance
- Final merits · Petitioner met only two criteria; did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Scholarships and grants not documented as national or internationally recognized awards; employment is separate criterion |
 Original contributions | Not met | Letters did not explain impact on field; invitations to review journals do not meet this criterion; article inclusion in books lacked demonstrated importance |
 Commercial success | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion listed in regulations but petitioner did not claim or submit evidence for this criterion |
 Exhibitions | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion listed in regulations but petitioner did not claim or submit evidence for this criterion |
 High salary | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion listed in regulations but petitioner did not claim or submit evidence for this criterion |
 Leading or critical role | Claimed, not analyzed | Petitioner did not claim this criterion |
 Membership | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion listed in regulations but petitioner did not claim or submit evidence for this criterion |
 Published material | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion listed in regulations but petitioner did not claim or submit evidence for this criterion |
 Scholarly articles | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion listed in regulations but petitioner did not claim or submit evidence for this criterion |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner met only two criteria; did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.