EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN242005_01B2203
Scholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A scientist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability, claiming awards, membership, and published material with citations. The AAO found only the scholarly articles criterion met through citation evidence. Two criteria are insufficient, and the overall evidence failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.
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
- Scholarly articles · Citation indices demonstrate acceptable degree of interest and reliance on petitioner's published work
What was missing
- Awards · Best paper awards lack evidence of total number presented, percentage recognition, criteria, or national media coverage
- Membership · Membership based on education and experience, not outstanding achievement as essential condition
- Published material · Published material criterion addressed under scholarly articles criterion instead
- Final merits · Only two criteria met; evidence does not establish sustained national or international acclaim at top level
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Scholarly articles | Met | Citation indices demonstrate acceptable degree of interest and reliance on petitioner's published work |
 Awards | Not met | Best paper awards lack evidence of total number presented, percentage recognition, criteria, or national media coverage |
 Membership | Not met | Membership based on education and experience, not outstanding achievement as essential condition |
 Published material | Not met | Published material criterion addressed under scholarly articles criterion instead |
 Final merits | Not met | Only two criteria met; evidence 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.