EB-1AEducation and academiaEmployerDecided 2009Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Jun042009_03B2203
AwardsNot metJudgingNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
An employer sponsored a beneficiary for EB-1A extraordinary ability in music education. The beneficiary did not meet multiple criteria; letters and certificates were insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim at the highest level. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the beneficiary had not distinguished herself above others nationally or internationally.
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 of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards submitted
- Judging · Letters of recommendation insufficient; no evidence of judging work of others
- Membership · No evidence that associations required outstanding achievements as essential condition
- Original contributions · Evidence insufficient to establish major significance contributions in field
- Published material · Articles were not primarily about beneficiary; not published in major media
- Scholarly articles · No evidence provided initially or in response to RFE
- Final merits · Evidence does not establish beneficiary in small percentage at very top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | No evidence of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards submitted |
 Judging | Not met | Letters of recommendation insufficient; no evidence of judging work of others |
 Membership | Not met | No evidence that associations required outstanding achievements as essential condition |
 Original contributions | Not met | Evidence insufficient to establish major significance contributions in field |
 Published material | Not met | Articles were not primarily about beneficiary; not published in major media |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | No evidence provided initially or in response to RFE |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence does not establish beneficiary in small percentage at very top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.