Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AHealthcare, clinicalIndividualDecided May 2025Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

MAY302025_01B2203

AwardsNot metOriginal contributionsNot metJudgingClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

A pharmacist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed seven criteria on appeal but had abandoned three (membership, published material, scholarly articles) during RFE. AAO found she failed to meet at least three criteria; abandoned criteria were not reconsidered. Awards and original contributions were not adequately documented. Appeal dismissed.

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

  • Awards · Awards did not demonstrate national or international level recognition as required
  • Original contributions · Evidence was complimentary but did not demonstrate field-wide impact or significance
  • Final merits · Record does not establish sustained national or international acclaim or top-of-field status

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
AwardsNot metAwards did not demonstrate national or international level recognition as required
Original contributionsNot metEvidence was complimentary but did not demonstrate field-wide impact or significance
JudgingClaimed, not analyzedClaimed in appeal but not substantively analyzed after RFE abandonment
Leading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedClaimed in appeal but not substantively analyzed after RFE abandonment
MembershipClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; abandoned in RFE response, criteria not developed substantively
Published materialClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; abandoned in RFE response, criteria not developed substantively
Scholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; abandoned in RFE response, criteria not developed substantively
Final meritsNot metRecord does not establish sustained national or international acclaim or top-of-field status

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.