EB-1AEducation and academiaIndividualDecided May 2020Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
MAY272020_05B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metPublished materialNot metHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Mathematics educator sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed, finding only two of three required criteria met (judging and scholarly articles). Coaching awards lacked evidence of national recognition, and publications did not meet major media standards.
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 judging criterion.
- Scholarly articles · Director and AAO agreed petitioner met scholarly articles criterion.
What was missing
- Awards · First Level Coach title criteria incomplete and inconsistent; gold coaching award lacks evidence of national or international field recognition.
- Published material · Articles lacked evidence that publications are major media; cannot establish print or online publication in major outlets.
- Final merits · Did not meet three criteria threshold; no evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or presence among top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director and AAO agreed petitioner met judging criterion. |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Director and AAO agreed petitioner met scholarly articles criterion. |
 Awards | Not met | First Level Coach title criteria incomplete and inconsistent; gold coaching award lacks evidence of national or international field recognition. |
 Published material | Not met | Articles lacked evidence that publications are major media; cannot establish print or online publication in major outlets. |
 High salary | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner did not appeal director's finding or provide additional evidence. |
 Original contributions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; petitioner did not appeal director's finding or provide additional evidence. |
 Final merits | Not met | Did not meet three criteria threshold; no evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or presence among top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.