Outcome: Dismissed
MAR182025_02B2203
Our summary
Drilling engineer and entrepreneur sought extraordinary ability classification. Claimed five criteria including awards, published material, original contributions, leading role, and high salary. AAO affirmed denial, finding awards lacked recognition, article was promotional, and salary claims ignored remuneration requirement. Overall work did not demonstrate sustained national acclaim at extraordinary ability level.
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
- Awards · Awards limited to single employer lack wider recognition; unsupported claims regarding award receipt
- High salary · Company revenue figures not relevant; no evidence of exceptional remuneration relative to field peers
- Published material · Submitted article deemed promotional material rather than professional or major trade publication
- Final merits · Petitioner documented productive career but not recognized at top-of-field level required
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | Awards limited to single employer lack wider recognition; unsupported claims regarding award receipt | |
| Not met | Company revenue figures not relevant; no evidence of exceptional remuneration relative to field peers | |
| Not met | Submitted article deemed promotional material rather than professional or major trade publication | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision | |
| Not met | Petitioner documented productive career but not recognized at top-of-field level required |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
