EB-1AEducation and academiaIndividualDecided 2012Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
May032012_01B2203
JudgingMetOriginal contributionsMetScholarly articlesMetFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
An academic or educator claimed three evidentiary criteria were satisfied. Although technically meeting the judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles categories, the AAO found the evidence reflected routine duties rather than sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field, failing the final merits determination.
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 · Petitioner submitted evidence meeting plain language of judging criterion
- Original contributions · Petitioner submitted evidence meeting plain language of original contributions criterion
- Scholarly articles · Petitioner submitted evidence meeting plain language of scholarly articles criterion
What was missing
- Final merits · Evidence reflects routine accomplishments not comparable to top of field; does not show sustained acclaim
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Petitioner submitted evidence meeting plain language of judging criterion |
 Original contributions | Met | Petitioner submitted evidence meeting plain language of original contributions criterion |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Petitioner submitted evidence meeting plain language of scholarly articles criterion |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence reflects routine accomplishments not comparable to top of field; does not show sustained acclaim |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.