EB-1AComputer science and AIIndividualDecided March 2021Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
MAR262021_01B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Computer science associate professor claimed three evidentiary criteria. AAO affirmed two were met but rejected original contributions claim. With only two criteria established, petitioner failed the initial evidentiary requirement and could not proceed to final merits analysis.
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 · Director and AAO agreed petitioner met criterion for judging others' work
- Scholarly articles · Director and AAO agreed petitioner met criterion for authorship of scholarly articles
What was missing
- Original contributions · Highly-cited publications and high-ranking journals insufficient; petitioner failed to show contributions were of major significance
- Final merits · Only two criteria met; fell short of three-criterion threshold and lacked sustained national or international acclaim
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director and AAO agreed petitioner met criterion for judging others' work |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Director and AAO agreed petitioner met criterion for authorship of scholarly articles |
 Original contributions | Not met | Highly-cited publications and high-ranking journals insufficient; petitioner failed to show contributions were of major significance |
 Final merits | Not met | Only two criteria met; fell short of three-criterion threshold and lacked sustained national or international acclaim |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.