EB-1AMechanical and aerospace engineeringEmployerDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN242005_22B2203
AwardsNot metMembershipNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Mechanical engineer researcher claiming EB-1A extraordinary ability. Counsel argued petitioner's important research should qualify despite criterion requirements. AAO found evidence shows talent but fails to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among top of field, dismissing appeal.
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 that petitioner received nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards
- Membership · Invitation to Who's Who in Science and Engineering does not demonstrate exclusive membership requiring national or international expert selection
- Final merits · Evidence shows talent but not sustained national or international acclaim placing petitioner among small percentage at very top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | No evidence submitted that petitioner received nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards |
 Membership | Not met | Invitation to Who's Who in Science and Engineering does not demonstrate exclusive membership requiring national or international expert selection |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence shows talent but not sustained national or international acclaim placing petitioner among small percentage at very top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.