Outcome: Dismissed
Jul282009_01B2203
Our summary
Microbiologist filed self-petition seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed at least three regulatory criteria including original contributions and scholarly articles. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner 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.
No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award demonstrated
- Leading or critical role · Director found petitioner did not satisfy; AAO disagreed with director approval
- Membership · Does not establish membership in exclusive associations
- Original contributions · Work shows incremental improvements only, no demonstrable field impact
- Published material · No evidence of published material about petitioner in major media
- Scholarly articles · Articles published but no evidence of sustained national or international impact
- Final merits · Achievements do not set petitioner significantly above others at top level
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | No major internationally recognized award demonstrated | |
| Not met | Director found petitioner did not satisfy; AAO disagreed with director approval | |
| Not met | Does not establish membership in exclusive associations | |
| Not met | Work shows incremental improvements only, no demonstrable field impact | |
| Not met | No evidence of published material about petitioner in major media | |
| Not met | Articles published but no evidence of sustained national or international impact | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision | |
| Not met | Achievements do not set petitioner significantly above others at top level |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
