EB-1AComputer science and AIIndividualDecided March 2026Remanded
Outcome: Remanded
MAR192026_01B2203
JudgingMetLeading or critical roleMetScholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metMembershipClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed
Our summary
AI solutions architect claimed seven extraordinary ability criteria. AAO found petitioner met three required criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and leading role. The case was remanded to SCOPS for final merits determination on whether the totality of evidence establishes extraordinary ability.
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 · SCOPS and AAO agreed petitioner met criterion for participation as judge.
- Leading or critical role · SCOPS and AAO agreed petitioner met leading or critical role criterion.
- Scholarly articles · AAO found journal articles satisfy the scholarly articles criterion; book and biographies do not.
What was missing
- Awards · No major, internationally recognized award received or indicated.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | SCOPS and AAO agreed petitioner met criterion for participation as judge. |
 Leading or critical role | Met | SCOPS and AAO agreed petitioner met leading or critical role criterion. |
 Scholarly articles | Met | AAO found journal articles satisfy the scholarly articles criterion; book and biographies do not. |
 Awards | Not met | No major, internationally recognized award received or indicated. |
 Membership | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in outcome; SCOPS denial on other grounds. |
 Original contributions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed by AAO; remanded before final determination. |
 Published material | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; AAO did not reach this criterion. |
 Final merits | Not reached / not discussed | Three criteria met; case remanded for final merits determination; no final merits decision issued. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.