Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2012Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

May142012_03B2203

JudgingMetOriginal contributionsMetScholarly articlesMetFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

Scientist self-petitioner satisfied three regulatory criteria by plain language count. However, AAO's final merits determination found evidence reflected routine accomplishments inconsistent with sustained national or international acclaim. Petitioner failed to demonstrate placement among most experienced and renowned members, so appeal dismissed.

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 · Evidence technically qualifies under plain language of criterion
  • Original contributions · Evidence technically qualifies under plain language of criterion
  • Scholarly articles · Evidence technically qualifies under plain language of criterion

What was missing

  • Final merits · Evidence reflects routine duties and accomplishments below sustained international acclaim; does not demonstrate top small percentage

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingMetEvidence technically qualifies under plain language of criterion
Original contributionsMetEvidence technically qualifies under plain language of criterion
Scholarly articlesMetEvidence technically qualifies under plain language of criterion
Final meritsNot metEvidence reflects routine duties and accomplishments below sustained international acclaim; does not demonstrate top small percentage

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.