Outcome: Dismissed
JUN102005_07B2203
Our summary
Food scientist claimed extraordinary ability through membership, publications, judging, and other criteria. AAO rejected membership, published material in directories, and editorial judging as insufficient. Letters from colleagues in single province not national experts. Overall evidence fails to show sustained national acclaim or presence at top level.
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
- Judging · Editorial duties not indicative of national or international acclaim; role significance not established
- Membership · Petitioner failed to establish membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements
- Published material · Appearing in directories as one of thousands insufficient; biographies not in qualifying media
- Final merits · Record does not establish sustained national acclaim or distinction among top food scientists in field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | Editorial duties not indicative of national or international acclaim; role significance not established | |
| Not met | Petitioner failed to establish membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements | |
| Not met | Appearing in directories as one of thousands insufficient; biographies not in qualifying media | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed | |
| Not met | Record does not establish sustained national acclaim or distinction among top food scientists in field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
