EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2007Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Jun072007_02B2203
Original contributionsMetScholarly articlesMetPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Research scientist in molecular biology claimed extraordinary ability in sciences. Submitted evidence of patents, scholarly articles, and published materials. AAO found two criteria satisfied but three required; evidence showed talent and potential but not sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. Appeal dismissed.
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
- Original contributions · Two patents and letter discussing importance of petitioner's innovations accepted
- Scholarly articles · Petitioner's publications satisfy criterion despite director's initial rejection
What was missing
- Published material · Articles discussed supervisor's work, not primarily about petitioner; petitioner not named except in references
- Final merits · Only two of three required criteria met; evidence does not show petitioner among small percentage at very top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Original contributions | Met | Two patents and letter discussing importance of petitioner's innovations accepted |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Petitioner's publications satisfy criterion despite director's initial rejection |
 Published material | Not met | Articles discussed supervisor's work, not primarily about petitioner; petitioner not named except in references |
 Final merits | Not met | Only two of three required criteria met; evidence does not show 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.