EB-1AMechanical and aerospace engineeringEmployerDecided 2017Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN132017_01B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Automation and control engineer employed by U.S. company sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met two criteria (judging and scholarly articles) but failed to meet required third criterion. Awards, membership, published material, and original contributions findings all insufficient. AAO affirmed dismissal.
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 petitioner satisfied this criterion
- Scholarly articles · Director and AAO agreed petitioner authored articles in professional journals
What was missing
- Awards · Conference award not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized; patents alone insufficient
- Membership · No evidence provided of membership in qualifying association
- Original contributions · Patents and citations alone do not demonstrate original contributions of major significance
- Published material · Articles about his work rather than about him do not satisfy criterion
- Final merits · Record does not support expertise level required for classification
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director found petitioner satisfied this criterion |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Director and AAO agreed petitioner authored articles in professional journals |
 Awards | Not met | Conference award not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized; patents alone insufficient |
 Membership | Not met | No evidence provided of membership in qualifying association |
 Original contributions | Not met | Patents and citations alone do not demonstrate original contributions of major significance |
 Published material | Not met | Articles about his work rather than about him do not satisfy criterion |
 Final merits | Not met | Record does not support expertise level required for classification |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.