EB-1ALife sciences and medicineEmployerDecided 2013Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUL262013_01B2203
JudgingMetOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Scientist petitioner met judging criterion but failed original contributions requirement. AAO found that letters referencing potential groundwork and foundation for future research did not demonstrate major significance as of filing date. Petition dismissed as burden not met 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.
What the AAO accepted
- Judging · Sufficient evidence of participation as judge of work of others
What was missing
- Original contributions · Submitted evidence does not demonstrate contributions of major significance; potential impact insufficient for criterion
- Final merits · Petitioner failed to establish three qualifying criteria and sustained acclaim at time of filing
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Sufficient evidence of participation as judge of work of others |
 Original contributions | Not met | Submitted evidence does not demonstrate contributions of major significance; potential impact insufficient for criterion |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner failed to establish three qualifying criteria and sustained acclaim at time of filing |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.