EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2009Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
Mar312009_02B2203
AwardsNot metLeading or critical roleNot metMembershipNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Self-represented postdoctoral researcher claimed extraordinary ability as scientist based on awards, memberships, published material, and teaching roles. AAO found awards insufficient, memberships not based on outstanding achievement, articles not primarily about petitioner, and teaching roles not at very top level. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet three criteria.
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 · PhD degree not a prize or award; International Student Fellowship unsubstantiated; Who's Who invitation does not constitute nationally recognized award
- Leading or critical role · Teaching experience at UCLA and University of Michigan does not demonstrate leading or critical role at very top level
- Membership · Lesser category of member does not qualify; no evidence membership required outstanding achievement as essential condition
- Published material · Seventeen articles not primarily about petitioner as required; must appear in professional or major trade publications
- Final merits · Petitioner failed to establish three criteria and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | PhD degree not a prize or award; International Student Fellowship unsubstantiated; Who's Who invitation does not constitute nationally recognized award |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Teaching experience at UCLA and University of Michigan does not demonstrate leading or critical role at very top level |
 Membership | Not met | Lesser category of member does not qualify; no evidence membership required outstanding achievement as essential condition |
 Published material | Not met | Seventeen articles not primarily about petitioner as required; must appear in professional or major trade publications |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner failed to establish three criteria and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.