Outcome: Dismissed
JUN232026_03B2203
Our summary
Information technology and AI professional claimed extraordinary ability. USCIS found three criteria met: judging, scholarly articles, and leading roles. Final merits determination concluded petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim required for top-tier field status. Appeal dismissed; unpublished district court ruling not binding.
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 · USCIS found petitioner met judging criterion
- Leading or critical role · USCIS found petitioner met leading or critical roles criterion
- Scholarly articles · USCIS found petitioner met scholarly articles criterion
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award shown
- Membership · Did not meet membership criterion
- Original contributions · Did not meet original contributions criterion
- Published material · Did not meet published material criterion
- Final merits · Despite three criteria met, final merits showed lack of sustained national or international acclaim
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | USCIS found petitioner met judging criterion | |
| Met | USCIS found petitioner met leading or critical roles criterion | |
| Met | USCIS found petitioner met scholarly articles criterion | |
| Not met | No major internationally recognized award shown | |
| Not met | Did not meet membership criterion | |
| Not met | Did not meet original contributions criterion | |
| Not met | Did not meet published material criterion | |
| Not met | Despite three criteria met, final merits showed lack of sustained national or international acclaim |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
