Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AMechanical and aerospace engineeringIndividualDecided March 2025Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

MAR182025_02B2203

AwardsNot metHigh salaryNot metPublished materialNot metLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

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

CriterionReadingWhy
AwardsNot metAwards limited to single employer lack wider recognition; unsupported claims regarding award receipt
High salaryNot metCompany revenue figures not relevant; no evidence of exceptional remuneration relative to field peers
Published materialNot metSubmitted article deemed promotional material rather than professional or major trade publication
Leading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed in decision
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed in decision
Final meritsNot metPetitioner 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.

Similar decisions

Decisions whose text is closest to this one.