Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AOtherIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

JUN032005_02B2203

High salaryNot metAwardsClaimed, not analyzedJudgingClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

A self-petitioner sought EB-1A classification for a beneficiary with twenty years in marine propeller repair and instruction. The petitioner submitted only assertions without supporting documentation of any regulatory criteria, and the AAO found the record lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Official PDF

Official PDF ↗

Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.

No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.

What was missing

  • High salary · Record lacks tax returns or evidence of remuneration compared with others in propeller repair field
  • Final merits · Beneficiary not shown to have achieved sustained national or international acclaim or to be within small percentage at very top of field

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
High salaryNot metRecord lacks tax returns or evidence of remuneration compared with others in propeller repair field
AwardsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed
JudgingClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed
Leading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed
MembershipClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed
Published materialClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed
Scholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed
Final meritsNot metBeneficiary not shown to have achieved sustained national or international acclaim or to be within small percentage at very 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.