EB-1AChemistry and materialsIndividualDecided June 2021Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN072021_01B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Environmental and chemical/petroleum engineer self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability based on scholarly articles, judging, and original contributions of major significance. AAO found only two criteria met; original contributions lacked evidence of major significance or widespread impact. Appeal dismissed as petitioner failed to demonstrate 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.
What the AAO accepted
- Judging · Service as peer reviewer for scientific journals established
- Scholarly articles · Ample evidence of authorship of scholarly articles in field
What was missing
- Original contributions · Work served as basis for comparison but not shown to be of major significance or widely adopted
- Final merits · Does not meet requirement for sustained national or international acclaim at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Service as peer reviewer for scientific journals established |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Ample evidence of authorship of scholarly articles in field |
 Original contributions | Not met | Work served as basis for comparison but not shown to be of major significance or widely adopted |
 Final merits | Not met | Does not meet requirement for 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.