EB-1AArts, design, architectureIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN162005_12B2203
AwardsNot metLeading or critical roleNot metOriginal contributionsNot metScholarly articlesNot metPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Self-represented petitioner, editor and writer of local chronicles in China with twenty-year career. Claimed extraordinary ability through awards, scholarly articles, and original contributions. AAO dismissed appeal, finding one national award and single article recognition insufficient, uncertified translations of recommendation letters inadmissible, and no evidence of sustained acclaim or intent to continue work in United States.
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 · One national award over twenty-year career does not reflect sustained acclaim
- Leading or critical role · No evidence of specific role nature, distinguished reputation, or critical role performance
- Original contributions · Recommendation letters alone cannot establish major significance beyond limited colleagues
- Scholarly articles · One-time recognition of one article over career does not demonstrate sustained acclaim
- Final merits · Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at field top
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | One national award over twenty-year career does not reflect sustained acclaim |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | No evidence of specific role nature, distinguished reputation, or critical role performance |
 Original contributions | Not met | Recommendation letters alone cannot establish major significance beyond limited colleagues |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | One-time recognition of one article over career does not demonstrate sustained acclaim |
 Published material | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed as separate criterion |
 Final merits | Not met | Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at field top |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.