EB-1AHealthcare, clinicalEmployerDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN242005_21B2203
AwardsNot metJudgingNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
An anesthesiologist beneficiary of an employer-sponsored petition claimed extraordinary ability. The AAO rejected all criteria analyzed, finding that training residents, institutional affiliation, and solicited letters do not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.
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 · University test results not nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
- Judging · Training residents and fellows is routine responsibility; no evidence of judging board-certified physicians
- Leading or critical role · Role at affiliated institution; reference letters are not first-hand evidence of sustained acclaim
- Membership · Medical association memberships based on exam completion or training, not outstanding achievement
- Scholarly articles · No citation index provided; no evidence of extensive independent citation by scientific community
- Final merits · Evidence does not establish beneficiary distinguished at very top of field or with sustained national or international acclaim
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | University test results not nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards |
 Judging | Not met | Training residents and fellows is routine responsibility; no evidence of judging board-certified physicians |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Role at affiliated institution; reference letters are not first-hand evidence of sustained acclaim |
 Membership | Not met | Medical association memberships based on exam completion or training, not outstanding achievement |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | No citation index provided; no evidence of extensive independent citation by scientific community |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence does not establish beneficiary distinguished at very top of field or with sustained national or international acclaim |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.