Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AComputer science and AIIndividualDecided March 2026Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

MAR172026_02B2203

High salaryMetJudgingMetLeading or critical roleMetPublished materialMetScholarly articlesMetMembershipClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

A cybersecurity engineer claiming extraordinary ability in EB-1A satisfied four of seven claimed criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding that while regulatory criteria were met, the totality of evidence failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and placement among the very top in the field.

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 · Service center found petitioner commanded high salary in field
  • Judging · Service center found petitioner participated as judge of others' work
  • Leading or critical role · Service center found petitioner held leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
  • Published material · Service center found criterion met; AAO did not disturb this finding
  • Scholarly articles · Service center found criterion met; authorship of scholarly articles established

What was missing

  • Final merits · Evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier status

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
High salaryMetService center found petitioner commanded high salary in field
JudgingMetService center found petitioner participated as judge of others' work
Leading or critical roleMetService center found petitioner held leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
Published materialMetService center found criterion met; AAO did not disturb this finding
Scholarly articlesMetService center found criterion met; authorship of scholarly articles established
MembershipClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; decision does not address this criterion
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed as separate criterion in final determination
Final meritsNot metEvidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international 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.