EB-1ABusiness and managementIndividualDecided March 2026Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
MAR092026_02B2203
JudgingNot metOriginal contributionsNot metCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed
Our summary
Information technology manager from Argentina sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed three additional criteria beyond two previously found by SCOPS. AAO found petitioner did not meet at least three of ten criteria: withdrew judging criterion based on lack of actual participation evidence in conference archives, rejected original contributions criterion for lack of meaningful field impact, and found no basis for other claims. 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
- Judging · Petitioner submitted invitation letters but did not demonstrate actual participation in judging work of others; no corroboration in conference archives.
- Original contributions · Work not shown to be unusually influential or highly acclaimed; no evidence of meaningful interest at conferences where presented.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Not met | Petitioner submitted invitation letters but did not demonstrate actual participation in judging work of others; no corroboration in conference archives. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Work not shown to be unusually influential or highly acclaimed; no evidence of meaningful interest at conferences where presented. |
 Commercial success | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed as separate criterion in decision. |
 High salary | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed as separate criterion in decision. |
 Leading or critical role | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed as separate criterion in decision. |
 Membership | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed as separate criterion in decision. |
 Published material | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed as separate criterion in decision. |
 Scholarly articles | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed as separate criterion in decision. |
 Final merits | Not reached / not discussed | Petitioner failed initial criteria threshold; final merits analysis reserved and not reached. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.