Outcome: Dismissed
May142012_03B2203
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
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Evidence technically qualifies under plain language of criterion | |
| Met | Evidence technically qualifies under plain language of criterion | |
| Met | Evidence technically qualifies under plain language of criterion | |
| Not met | Evidence 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.
