Outcome: Dismissed
JUN142005_12B2203
Our summary
Self-petitioner research scientist claimed extraordinary ability through awards, memberships, judging, and scholarly contributions. AAO held academic honors insufficient, memberships lacked outstanding achievement requirements, judging work inconsistent with acclaim standard, and citations too minimal. Meaningful contributions not equaling top-level sustained acclaim. Appeal dismissed.
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 honors are evidence of scholastic achievement, not national or international recognition as excellent research scientist
- Judging · Petitioner's judgment of others' work inconsistent with requisite sustained acclaim for extraordinary ability
- Membership · Record does not establish that ASM, SIM, or AEESP require outstanding achievements of members; no criteria documentation provided
- Original contributions · Minimal citation of only three articles does not indicate major impact in field or requisite sustained national or international acclaim
- Scholarly articles · Citation information minimal; does not demonstrate work of major significance in field beyond limited professional relationships
- Final merits · Evidence shows meaningful contributions but does not establish sustained national or international acclaim at top level
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | Academic honors are evidence of scholastic achievement, not national or international recognition as excellent research scientist | |
| Not met | Petitioner's judgment of others' work inconsistent with requisite sustained acclaim for extraordinary ability | |
| Not met | Record does not establish that ASM, SIM, or AEESP require outstanding achievements of members; no criteria documentation provided | |
| Not met | Minimal citation of only three articles does not indicate major impact in field or requisite sustained national or international acclaim | |
| Not met | Citation information minimal; does not demonstrate work of major significance in field beyond limited professional relationships | |
| Not met | Evidence shows meaningful contributions but does not establish sustained national or international acclaim at top level |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
