Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AOtherIndividualDecided 2026Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

JUL222026_06B2203

JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetHigh salaryNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

An occupational health and safety specialist appealed denial of EB-1A classification. The petitioner met criteria for judging and scholarly articles but failed to establish other claimed criteria. The AAO affirmed that the totality of evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the top of the field, dismissing the appeal.

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 · Petitioner met criterion for participation as judge of others' work
  • Scholarly articles · Petitioner met criterion for authorship of scholarly articles

What was missing

  • High salary · AAO withdrew service center's favorable determination
  • Leading or critical role · AAO withdrew service center's favorable determination
  • Membership · Associations did not require outstanding achievements as judged by recognized experts
  • Final merits · Record insufficient to show sustained national or international acclaim at top of field

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingMetPetitioner met criterion for participation as judge of others' work
Scholarly articlesMetPetitioner met criterion for authorship of scholarly articles
High salaryNot metAAO withdrew service center's favorable determination
Leading or critical roleNot metAAO withdrew service center's favorable determination
MembershipNot metAssociations did not require outstanding achievements as judged by recognized experts
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedNot discussed; claim waived on appeal
Final meritsNot metRecord insufficient to show sustained national or international acclaim at top of field

A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.

Similar decisions

Decisions whose text is closest to this one.