Outcome: Dismissed
NOV182024_03B2203
Our summary
An oil industry professional seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claimed four criteria including awards, membership, original contributions, and leading role. The AAO dismissed, finding none met the standards; the honorary certificate and professional association membership lacked required recognition level, and employer contributions did not establish national acclaim.
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 · Honorary certificate lacked evidence of national or international recognition; certificate recipient lacks demonstration of outstanding achievement criteria.
- Leading or critical role · Positive contributions to employers did not translate to individual recognition at level of sustained national or international acclaim.
- Membership · Society of Petroleum Engineers membership does not require outstanding achievements; merely professional membership without evidence of exceptional standing.
- Original contributions · Letters from colleagues described contributions but did not demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field.
- Final merits · Record does not demonstrate petitioner is among small percentage at very top of oil and energy field; failed to meet three-criterion threshold.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | Honorary certificate lacked evidence of national or international recognition; certificate recipient lacks demonstration of outstanding achievement criteria. | |
| Not met | Positive contributions to employers did not translate to individual recognition at level of sustained national or international acclaim. | |
| Not met | Society of Petroleum Engineers membership does not require outstanding achievements; merely professional membership without evidence of exceptional standing. | |
| Not met | Letters from colleagues described contributions but did not demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed on appeal but not analyzed by AAO in decision. | |
| Not met | Record does not demonstrate petitioner is among small percentage at very top of oil and energy field; failed to meet three-criterion threshold. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
