Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1ALaw, policy, social scienceIndividualDecided November 2020Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

NOV272020_02B2203

JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

Professor and researcher in law petitioned for extraordinary ability. Director found two criteria met (judging and scholarly articles). On appeal, petitioner claimed two additional criteria (published material and original contributions), both rejected. Appeal dismissed; only two criteria met, three required. Insufficient sustained acclaim evidence.

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 participated as judge of work in field.
  • Scholarly articles · Petitioner authored scholarly articles in professional publications.

What was missing

  • Awards · No major, internationally recognized award established.
  • Original contributions · Proposed legal revisions not implemented; no contribution demonstrated.
  • Published material · Published material not about petitioner; articles either quotations or written by petitioner.
  • Final merits · Only two criteria met; three required. Insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim at top of field.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
JudgingMetPetitioner participated as judge of work in field.
Scholarly articlesMetPetitioner authored scholarly articles in professional publications.
AwardsNot metNo major, internationally recognized award established.
Original contributionsNot metProposed legal revisions not implemented; no contribution demonstrated.
Published materialNot metPublished material not about petitioner; articles either quotations or written by petitioner.
Final meritsNot metOnly two criteria met; three required. Insufficient evidence of 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.

Similar decisions

Decisions whose text is closest to this one.