Outcome: Dismissed
MAR232020_01B2203
Our summary
A chemistry, manufacturing, and controls regulatory affairs researcher met three evidentiary criteria (published material, judging, scholarly articles). However, on final merits the AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national acclaim or that she ranked among the very top of her field. Limited press coverage and peer review activities did not demonstrate differentiation from peers. Appeal dismissed.
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 · Served as peer reviewer for articles in professional journals
- Published material · Two media articles about beneficiary published, though limited in scope
- Scholarly articles · Published articles in professional journals; book chapters with global circulation
What was missing
- Final merits · Two press articles insufficient for sustained acclaim; peer review and publication rate not differentiated from peers
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Served as peer reviewer for articles in professional journals | |
| Met | Two media articles about beneficiary published, though limited in scope | |
| Met | Published articles in professional journals; book chapters with global circulation | |
| Not met | Two press articles insufficient for sustained acclaim; peer review and publication rate not differentiated from peers |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
