EB-1AHealthcare, clinicalIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN232005_07B2203
AwardsNot metJudgingNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A registered somatic movement therapist claimed extraordinary ability in sciences. She submitted a dance scholarship, association certifications, and peer-review activities as evidence. The AAO found the scholarship insufficient, certifications did not prove outstanding achievement, no published materials existed, and teaching did not constitute judging. She failed to meet the three-criterion threshold.
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 · Scholarship from 1982 is not an award for excellence and does not show sustained national or international acclaim twenty years later
- Judging · Teaching duties and peer-review work do not demonstrate judging peers at petitioner's professional level
- Membership · Certification in various techniques does not establish membership requiring outstanding achievements; certification is criterion for exceptional ability only
- Published material · No evidence of published materials about petitioner's work in major media or professional publications
- Final merits · Petitioner failed to meet three criteria; evidence shows talent but not sustained acclaim at top level of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Scholarship from 1982 is not an award for excellence and does not show sustained national or international acclaim twenty years later |
 Judging | Not met | Teaching duties and peer-review work do not demonstrate judging peers at petitioner's professional level |
 Membership | Not met | Certification in various techniques does not establish membership requiring outstanding achievements; certification is criterion for exceptional ability only |
 Published material | Not met | No evidence of published materials about petitioner's work in major media or professional publications |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner failed to meet three criteria; evidence shows talent but not sustained acclaim at top level of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.