EB-1AHealthcare, clinicalEmployerDecided 2023Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUL272023_01B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metAwardsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
An employer sponsored a radiation oncology physician for EB-1A extraordinary ability. The beneficiary met judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed membership and published material criteria. Original contributions not shown to have major significance. Extraordinary ability sustained acclaim was not established. Appeal dismissed.
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 · Director acknowledged beneficiary met judging criterion; decision does not dispute this finding.
- Scholarly articles · Director acknowledged beneficiary met authorship of scholarly articles criterion; decision does not dispute this finding.
What was missing
- Membership · Membership in professional organizations does not require outstanding achievements or judgment by recognized international experts.
- Original contributions · Work significance not demonstrated to be indicative of sustained national or international acclaim or career of acclaimed work.
- Published material · Submitted articles and materials are not about the beneficiary; advertising feature material lacks author identification.
- Final merits · Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that beneficiary is among small percentage at top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director acknowledged beneficiary met judging criterion; decision does not dispute this finding. |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Director acknowledged beneficiary met authorship of scholarly articles criterion; decision does not dispute this finding. |
 Membership | Not met | Membership in professional organizations does not require outstanding achievements or judgment by recognized international experts. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Work significance not demonstrated to be indicative of sustained national or international acclaim or career of acclaimed work. |
 Published material | Not met | Submitted articles and materials are not about the beneficiary; advertising feature material lacks author identification. |
 Awards | Claimed, not analyzed | Petitioner does not claim to meet awards criterion on appeal; not analyzed by decision. |
 Final merits | Not met | Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that beneficiary is among small percentage at top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.