EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided June 2020Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN092020_03B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A pharmacology researcher at a Malaysian university claimed six criteria for extraordinary ability. The AAO found only judging and scholarly articles met requirements. Original contributions lacked evidence of field significance; memberships did not require outstanding achievement; and the record failed to show sustained national or international acclaim.
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 found criterion met; AAO did not reverse
- Scholarly articles · Director found criterion met; AAO did not reverse
What was missing
- Awards · Awards not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in field
- Leading or critical role · University has distinguished reputation but petitioner did not perform in leading or critical role
- Membership · Membership levels claimed do not require outstanding achievements as judged by national or international experts
- Original contributions · Patent approval status unclear; supplement sales figures lack evidence of significance in field
- Final merits · Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or top percentage status
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director found criterion met; AAO did not reverse |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Director found criterion met; AAO did not reverse |
 Awards | Not met | Awards not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in field |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | University has distinguished reputation but petitioner did not perform in leading or critical role |
 Membership | Not met | Membership levels claimed do not require outstanding achievements as judged by national or international experts |
 Original contributions | Not met | Patent approval status unclear; supplement sales figures lack evidence of significance in field |
 Final merits | Not met | Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or top percentage status |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.