EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided 2005Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
NOV102005_08B2203
AwardsNot metHigh salaryNot metJudgingNot metMembershipNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Scientist in life sciences claimed extraordinary ability through four criteria. The AAO found no major international award and rejected all four criteria as lacking evidence of sustained acclaim at the very top of her field, thus denying the petition.
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 · Scholarships and fellowships for student study do not qualify; only established scientists eligible
- High salary · No evidence of high salary comparable to top scientists in field
- Judging · Single editorial review five years before filing does not show sustained acclaim
- Membership · SICB membership lacks evidence of outstanding achievement requirement; Sigma Xi membership not prerequisite
- Final merits · Record does not establish sustained national or international acclaim at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Scholarships and fellowships for student study do not qualify; only established scientists eligible |
 High salary | Not met | No evidence of high salary comparable to top scientists in field |
 Judging | Not met | Single editorial review five years before filing does not show sustained acclaim |
 Membership | Not met | SICB membership lacks evidence of outstanding achievement requirement; Sigma Xi membership not prerequisite |
 Final merits | Not met | Record does not establish sustained national or international acclaim at top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.