Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AEducation and academiaIndividualDecided March 2026Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

MAR302026_01B2203

JudgingMetLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot reached / not discussed

Our summary

ESL instructor claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Met judging criterion only. Membership and leading role criteria rejected; published material and original contributions waived on appeal; high salary reserved. Petitioner failed three-criterion threshold, so final merits not analyzed.

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 determined petitioner fulfilled judging criterion, finding not disturbed by AAO.

What was missing

  • Leading or critical role · Petitioner did not establish that ESL instructor and curriculum team role was leading or critical for employer; recommendation letters focused on typical duties.
  • Membership · Curriculum support team membership does not require outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts in the field.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingMetSCOPS determined petitioner fulfilled judging criterion, finding not disturbed by AAO.
Leading or critical roleNot metPetitioner did not establish that ESL instructor and curriculum team role was leading or critical for employer; recommendation letters focused on typical duties.
MembershipNot metCurriculum support team membership does not require outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts in the field.
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed initially but waived on appeal; not analyzed.
Published materialClaimed, not analyzedClaimed initially but waived on appeal; not analyzed.
Final meritsNot reached / not discussedNot reached; petitioner failed to meet three-criterion evidentiary threshold.

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.