Outcome: Dismissed
NOV212025_01B2203
Our summary
An honorary research professor in classical studies claimed seven evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. The service center accepted judging and scholarly articles. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the contested awards, membership, contributions and leading-role criteria unmet, so the three-criterion threshold failed and final merits were not reached.
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 · Service center found it satisfied and the appeal decision left that finding undisturbed.
- Scholarly articles · Service center found it satisfied and the appeal decision left that finding undisturbed.
What was missing
- Awards · Grants, fellowships and research permits were not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized prizes for excellence.
- Leading or critical role · Decision concluded the evidence did not satisfy this claimed criterion.
- Membership · Decision concluded the evidence did not satisfy this claimed criterion.
- Original contributions · Decision concluded the evidence did not satisfy this claimed criterion.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Service center found it satisfied and the appeal decision left that finding undisturbed. | |
| Met | Service center found it satisfied and the appeal decision left that finding undisturbed. | |
| Not met | Grants, fellowships and research permits were not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized prizes for excellence. | |
| Not met | Decision concluded the evidence did not satisfy this claimed criterion. | |
| Not met | Decision concluded the evidence did not satisfy this claimed criterion. | |
| Not met | Decision concluded the evidence did not satisfy this claimed criterion. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed on appeal because the petitioner did not contest the denial, so the issue was waived. | |
| Not reached / not discussed | Final merits determination expressly reserved because fewer than three criteria were met. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
