EB-1AComputer science and AIIndividualDecided November 2019Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
NOV292019_01B2203
JudgingMetOriginal contributionsMetScholarly articlesMetFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A computer scientist specializing in 5G networks and mobile analytics met three evidentiary criteria but the appeal was dismissed. The AAO found conference presentations, peer review work, article downloads, and grant funding did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for the small percentage at the very top.
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 · Director found petitioner met judging criterion; AAO did not disturb
- Original contributions · Director found petitioner met original contributions of major significance criterion
- Scholarly articles · Director found petitioner met authorship of scholarly articles criterion
What was missing
- Final merits · Evidence of peer recognition and citations insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director found petitioner met judging criterion; AAO did not disturb |
 Original contributions | Met | Director found petitioner met original contributions of major significance criterion |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Director found petitioner met authorship of scholarly articles criterion |
 Final merits | Not met | Evidence of peer recognition and citations insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim at top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.