Outcome: Dismissed
MAY192026_01B2203
Our summary
An economist sought extraordinary ability classification on reopened appeal after a finding that he submitted an altered paper naming him sole author. The AAO upheld the willful misrepresentation finding, concluded the evidentiary criteria and top-of-field standing were not shown, and dismissed the appeal without reaching continued work in the field.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.
What was missing
- Judging · Service center found none of the claimed criteria met; AAO concluded eligibility was not shown.
- Leading or critical role · Service center found none of the claimed criteria met; AAO concluded eligibility was not shown.
- Membership · Service center found none of the claimed criteria met; AAO concluded eligibility was not shown.
- Original contributions · Claim rested on a research paper whose cover page was altered to misstate authorship.
- Published material · Service center found none of the claimed criteria met; AAO concluded eligibility was not shown.
- Scholarly articles · Service center found none of the claimed criteria met; AAO concluded eligibility was not shown.
- Final merits · Record did not show the petitioner is among the small percentage at the top.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | Service center found none of the claimed criteria met; AAO concluded eligibility was not shown. | |
| Not met | Service center found none of the claimed criteria met; AAO concluded eligibility was not shown. | |
| Not met | Service center found none of the claimed criteria met; AAO concluded eligibility was not shown. | |
| Not met | Claim rested on a research paper whose cover page was altered to misstate authorship. | |
| Not met | Service center found none of the claimed criteria met; AAO concluded eligibility was not shown. | |
| Not met | Service center found none of the claimed criteria met; AAO concluded eligibility was not shown. | |
| Not met | Record did not show the petitioner is among the small percentage at the top. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
