EB-1APhysics and astronomyEmployerDecided November 2022Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
NOV072022_01B2203
JudgingMetPublished materialMetScholarly articlesMetFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Research associate in physics seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met three of ten initial evidentiary criteria including judging and scholarly articles. AAO held evidence insufficient for final merits determination; routine research activities and limited recognition do not establish sustained acclaim or top-tier status required for extraordinary ability.
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 reviewed other scientists' manuscripts; satisfies criterion under 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(iv)
- Published material · Director found evidence satisfying one additional initial criterion among ten listed
- Scholarly articles · Co-authorship of scholarly articles satisfies criterion under 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(vi)
What was missing
- Final merits · Limited peer review experience and co-authorship are routine among research scientists; insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or position among small percentage at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Petitioner reviewed other scientists' manuscripts; satisfies criterion under 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(iv) |
 Published material | Met | Director found evidence satisfying one additional initial criterion among ten listed |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Co-authorship of scholarly articles satisfies criterion under 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(vi) |
 Final merits | Not met | Limited peer review experience and co-authorship are routine among research scientists; insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or position among small percentage at top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.