EB-1ALife sciences and medicineEmployerDecided June 2021Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN252021_02B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metAwardsClaimed, not analyzedCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Postdoctoral biochemistry researcher sought extraordinary ability classification. Met only two of ten criteria despite claiming four additional ones on appeal. AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or position among very top of 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
- Judging · Director found met; AAO affirmed this finding
- Scholarly articles · Director found met; AAO affirmed this finding
What was missing
- Membership · ACS complimentary membership and INEF designation fail to demonstrate outstanding achievements required
- Published material · Book reviews about petitioner's book do not qualify as published material about petitioner
- Final merits · Evidence insufficient to show sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director found met; AAO affirmed this finding |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Director found met; AAO affirmed this finding |
 Membership | Not met | ACS complimentary membership and INEF designation fail to demonstrate outstanding achievements required |
 Published material | Not met | Book reviews about petitioner's book do not qualify as published material about petitioner |
 Awards | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but abandoned on appeal; petitioner did not contest director findings |
 Commercial success | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion not claimed |
 Exhibitions | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion not claimed |
 High salary | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion not claimed |
 Leading or critical role | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion not claimed |
 Original contributions | Claimed, not analyzed | Criterion not claimed on appeal |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence insufficient to show sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.