Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AEntrepreneurshipIndividualDecided March 2023Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

MAR132023_03B2203

JudgingMetLeading or critical roleMetAwardsNot metScholarly articlesNot metExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

A hospitality entrepreneur and bar professional sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming eight criteria. The Director accepted two, judging and leading role. The AAO agreed on those two but found the awards criterion unmet and deemed scholarly articles waived. It concluded that three criteria were not satisfied and that sustained acclaim was not shown.

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 · Director's favorable finding was agreed with by the AAO.
  • Leading or critical role · Director's favorable finding was agreed with by the AAO.

What was missing

  • Awards · Certificates lacked proof of national or international recognition and showed inconsistencies about what was awarded.
  • Scholarly articles · Director's adverse finding was not disputed on appeal, so the issue was deemed waived.
  • Final merits · Record did not show sustained acclaim or standing among the small percentage at the top.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingMetDirector's favorable finding was agreed with by the AAO.
Leading or critical roleMetDirector's favorable finding was agreed with by the AAO.
AwardsNot metCertificates lacked proof of national or international recognition and showed inconsistencies about what was awarded.
Scholarly articlesNot metDirector's adverse finding was not disputed on appeal, so the issue was deemed waived.
ExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; the available text does not show the decision on this criterion.
MembershipClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; the available text does not show the decision on this criterion.
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; the available text does not show the decision on this criterion.
Published materialClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; the available text does not show the decision on this criterion.
Final meritsNot metRecord did not show sustained acclaim or standing among the small percentage at the top.

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.