EB-1ABusiness and managementIndividualDecided 2025Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUL182025_01B2203
High salaryMetAwardsNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesNot metLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A chief executive of a vehicle parts supply company sought EB-1A classification in business, claiming eight criteria. The service center accepted only high salary. The AAO rejected awards, membership, published material and scholarly articles, did not reach the leading role criterion, and dismissed because three criteria were not met.
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
- High salary · Service center found high remuneration shown and the AAO left that finding undisturbed.
What was missing
- Awards · Awards were not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized or within the petitioner's field.
- Membership · Membership was in the field but not shown to require outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
- Published material · Petitioner did not show he satisfies the published material criterion.
- Scholarly articles · Petitioner did not show he satisfies the scholarly articles criterion.
- Final merits · Formal final merits step not conducted; aggregate review found insufficient acclaim and recognition.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 High salary | Met | Service center found high remuneration shown and the AAO left that finding undisturbed. |
 Awards | Not met | Awards were not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized or within the petitioner's field. |
 Membership | Not met | Membership was in the field but not shown to require outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts. |
 Published material | Not met | Petitioner did not show he satisfies the published material criterion. |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Petitioner did not show he satisfies the scholarly articles criterion. |
 Leading or critical role | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed on appeal but not reached because three criteria could not be met. |
 Final merits | Not met | Formal final merits step not conducted; aggregate review found insufficient acclaim and recognition. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.