EB-1AFinance and economicsIndividualDecided 2009Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Jun162009_01B2203
AwardsNot metJudgingNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metScholarly articlesNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Economist and educator claiming extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Petitioner submitted evidence of award, organization membership, judging invitations, original contributions, and scholarly articles. AAO found award lacked recognition, membership non-exclusive, judging insufficient, contributions not of major significance, and articles improperly translated. Appeal dismissed.
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 · Shell Cup award lacked evidence of national or international recognition
- Judging · Limited invitations to judge after petition filing; one in ten years insufficient for sustained acclaim
- Membership · Organization size alone insufficient; membership did not demonstrate outstanding achievement requirement
- Original contributions · Failed to establish original scholarly or business contributions of major significance
- Scholarly articles · Articles lacked full translations complying with regulatory requirements
- Final merits · Petitioner failed to meet major award or three regulatory criteria
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Shell Cup award lacked evidence of national or international recognition |
 Judging | Not met | Limited invitations to judge after petition filing; one in ten years insufficient for sustained acclaim |
 Membership | Not met | Organization size alone insufficient; membership did not demonstrate outstanding achievement requirement |
 Original contributions | Not met | Failed to establish original scholarly or business contributions of major significance |
 Scholarly articles | Not met | Articles lacked full translations complying with regulatory requirements |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner failed to meet major award or three regulatory criteria |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.