Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1ABusiness and managementIndividualDecided March 2026Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

MAR102026_04B2203

High salaryMetJudgingMetMembershipMetScholarly articlesMetLeading or critical roleNot metOriginal contributionsNot metAwardsClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

Enterprise architect self-petitioner claimed eight criteria; SCOPS found four met. AAO confirmed three met criteria but held totality of evidence insufficient to show sustained national or international acclaim or membership among small percentage at field top.

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

  • High salary · SCOPS found satisfied; AAO did not disturb
  • Judging · SCOPS found satisfied; AAO reviewed but found limited significance
  • Membership · SCOPS found satisfied; AAO did not disturb
  • Scholarly articles · SCOPS found satisfied; AAO did not disturb

What was missing

  • Leading or critical role · SCOPS analyzed and rejected; insufficient evidence of distinguished role
  • Original contributions · SCOPS analyzed and rejected; petitioner failed to show major significance
  • Final merits · AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim or top-tier status

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
High salaryMetSCOPS found satisfied; AAO did not disturb
JudgingMetSCOPS found satisfied; AAO reviewed but found limited significance
MembershipMetSCOPS found satisfied; AAO did not disturb
Scholarly articlesMetSCOPS found satisfied; AAO did not disturb
Leading or critical roleNot metSCOPS analyzed and rejected; insufficient evidence of distinguished role
Original contributionsNot metSCOPS analyzed and rejected; petitioner failed to show major significance
AwardsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed by SCOPS; AAO declined to reach
Published materialClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; not reached on appeal
Final meritsNot metAAO found insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim or top-tier status

A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.

Similar decisions

Decisions whose text is closest to this one.