EB-1AMarketing, media, communicationsIndividualDecided November 2022Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
NOV152022_01B2203
AwardsNot metMembershipNot metLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Public relations director sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed six criteria including awards, membership, and original contributions. AAO held she failed to meet at least three criteria: awards were organizational not individual, and membership evidence lacked required bylaws documentation.
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 · Awards were to her employers not petitioner; petitioner failed to show comparable evidence per regulation or her individual contribution to award criteria.
- Membership · Petitioner did not submit bylaws or direct documentary evidence of association membership requirements as requested in RFE.
- Final merits · Failed to meet three criteria threshold; no sustained national or international acclaim demonstrated at top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Awards were to her employers not petitioner; petitioner failed to show comparable evidence per regulation or her individual contribution to award criteria. |
 Membership | Not met | Petitioner did not submit bylaws or direct documentary evidence of association membership requirements as requested in RFE. |
 Leading or critical role | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; not addressed on appeal. |
 Original contributions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; not addressed on appeal. |
 Published material | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; not addressed on appeal. |
 Scholarly articles | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; not addressed on appeal. |
 Final merits | Not met | Failed to meet three criteria threshold; no sustained national or international acclaim demonstrated at top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.