Outcome: Dismissed
May142012_06B2203
Our summary
Self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability and cited selection as one of Directors of Creation as major achievement. The AAO found this selection did not constitute a major, internationally recognized award and petitioner failed to meet three required evidentiary criteria under awards, published material, and original contributions. 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 · Selection as one of Directors of Creation not shown to be major, internationally recognized award meeting regulatory standard.
- Original contributions · Petitioner did not demonstrate original contributions of major significance in field meeting regulatory requirement.
- Published material · Petitioner did not establish eligibility for published material about alien criterion; insufficient evidence submitted.
- Final merits · Petitioner failed to submit one major award or three qualifying evidentiary categories; not shown to be in small percentage at top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | Selection as one of Directors of Creation not shown to be major, internationally recognized award meeting regulatory standard. | |
| Not met | Petitioner did not demonstrate original contributions of major significance in field meeting regulatory requirement. | |
| Not met | Petitioner did not establish eligibility for published material about alien criterion; insufficient evidence submitted. | |
| Not met | Petitioner failed to submit one major award or three qualifying evidentiary categories; not shown to be in small percentage at top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
