Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AComputer science and AIEmployerDecided May 2026Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

MAY042026_01B2203

High salaryMetJudgingMetLeading or critical roleMetAwardsNot metFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

Data scientist in financial technology and artificial intelligence employed as vice president sought EB-1A classification. Met three criteria initially established by service center, but AAO withdrew the awards finding and found the totality of evidence insufficient to demonstrate extraordinary ability and placement among the top percentage of the field.

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

  • High salary · Service Center determined petitioner met high salary criterion; AAO did not disturb this finding
  • Judging · Service Center determined petitioner met judging criterion; AAO did not disturb this finding
  • Leading or critical role · Service Center determined petitioner met leading or critical role criterion; AAO did not disturb this finding

What was missing

  • Awards · Team awards do not qualify; petitioner not direct recipient of nationally or internationally recognized award
  • Final merits · Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or small percentage at top of field

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
High salaryMetService Center determined petitioner met high salary criterion; AAO did not disturb this finding
JudgingMetService Center determined petitioner met judging criterion; AAO did not disturb this finding
Leading or critical roleMetService Center determined petitioner met leading or critical role criterion; AAO did not disturb this finding
AwardsNot metTeam awards do not qualify; petitioner not direct recipient of nationally or internationally recognized award
Final meritsNot metPetitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or small percentage at top of field

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.