EB-1AMechanical and aerospace engineeringIndividualDecided March 2024Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
MAR042024_01B2203
JudgingMetLeading or critical roleMetScholarly articlesMetOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Mechanical engineer and researcher sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met three regulatory criteria: judging, scholarly articles, leading critical role. However, failed to establish major significance of original contributions and lacked sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.
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 · Participation in judging work of others in field evidenced by letter confirming actual performance and quality of review.
- Leading or critical role · Performed in leading role for organization with distinguished reputation.
- Scholarly articles · Authorship of scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media established.
What was missing
- Original contributions · Original contributions lacked evidence of major significance in field; insufficient contemporaneous probative evidence of significance.
- Final merits · Record demonstrated proficiency and promise but lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim; not among small percentage at very top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Participation in judging work of others in field evidenced by letter confirming actual performance and quality of review. |
 Leading or critical role | Met | Performed in leading role for organization with distinguished reputation. |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Authorship of scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media established. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Original contributions lacked evidence of major significance in field; insufficient contemporaneous probative evidence of significance. |
 Final merits | Not met | Record demonstrated proficiency and promise but lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim; not 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.