EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN132005_32B2203
AwardsNot metJudgingNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Postdoctoral researcher in sciences claimed extraordinary ability through awards, membership, publication, and peer review. AAO found all claimed criteria unmet: awards were academic only, membership lacked proof of outstanding achievement requirement, publication lacked journal verification, peer review was routine without distinction. Overall record failed to show sustained national acclaim or top-tier positioning.
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
- Awards · Academic awards and scholarships do not satisfy criterion; no awards themselves submitted
- Judging · Peer review is routine; no evidence setting petitioner apart, such as unusual volume or editorial position
- Membership · No evidence ASME requires outstanding achievement as essential condition for membership
- Published material · Article lacks journal identification and does not demonstrate peer-reviewed publication beyond Clemson University
- Final merits · Postdoctoral fellow shows talent but achievements do not set her significantly above field at very top level
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Academic awards and scholarships do not satisfy criterion; no awards themselves submitted |
 Judging | Not met | Peer review is routine; no evidence setting petitioner apart, such as unusual volume or editorial position |
 Membership | Not met | No evidence ASME requires outstanding achievement as essential condition for membership |
 Published material | Not met | Article lacks journal identification and does not demonstrate peer-reviewed publication beyond Clemson University |
 Final merits | Not met | Postdoctoral fellow shows talent but achievements do not set her significantly above field at very top level |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.