EB-1AMechanical and aerospace engineeringEmployerDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN242005_04B2203
AwardsNot metMembershipNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A mechanical engineer researcher claimed extraordinary ability through awards and memberships. The AAO rejected both criteria and the overall petition because the evidence did not demonstrate the petitioner achieved sustained national or international acclaim placing him among the very top in the field.
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 · No evidence submitted of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
- Membership · Who's Who invitation does not meet regulatory requirement for exclusive membership based on national or international expert selection
- Final merits · Record does not establish petitioner at very top of mechanical engineering field with sustained national or international acclaim
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | No evidence submitted of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards |
 Membership | Not met | Who's Who invitation does not meet regulatory requirement for exclusive membership based on national or international expert selection |
 Final merits | Not met | Record does not establish petitioner at very top of mechanical engineering field with sustained national or international acclaim |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.