Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
O-1ALife sciences and medicineAgentDecided 2014Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

JUL302014_01D8101

Original contributionsMetScholarly articlesMetPublished materialNot metAwardsClaimed, not analyzedJudgingClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

A scientist in the field of international development seeks O-1A classification. Petitioner claimed four criteria and established two: original contributions and scholarly articles. The decision found only two criteria satisfied; at least three are required. Appeal dismissed because beneficiary failed to demonstrate extraordinary ability at the top of the field.

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

  • Original contributions · Criterion (5) at 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B) established by petitioner
  • Scholarly articles · Criterion (6) at 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B) established by petitioner

What was missing

  • Published material · Articles about beneficiary's work did not meet regulatory requirement of being about the alien
  • Final merits · Only two of three required criteria met; extraordinary ability not demonstrated

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
Original contributionsMetCriterion (5) at 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B) established by petitioner
Scholarly articlesMetCriterion (6) at 8 CFR 214.2(o)(3)(iii)(B) established by petitioner
Published materialNot metArticles about beneficiary's work did not meet regulatory requirement of being about the alien
AwardsClaimed, not analyzedCriterion (A) not claimed or analyzed by petitioner
JudgingClaimed, not analyzedCriterion (1) not claimed by petitioner on appeal
Leading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedCriterion (7) claimed but not analyzed in decision
MembershipClaimed, not analyzedCriterion (2) not claimed by petitioner on appeal
Final meritsNot metOnly two of three required criteria met; extraordinary ability not demonstrated

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.