EB-1ALife sciences and medicineIndividualDecided November 2020Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
NOV302020_06B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetOriginal contributionsNot metLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Cardiovascular researcher self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability based on four criteria: judging, original contributions, scholarly articles, and leading role. AAO found only two criteria met; original contributions lacked evidence of major significance despite citations. Appeal dismissed as petitioner failed to establish three criteria and sustained national or international acclaim required.
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 · Participation as judge of work of others established
- Scholarly articles · Authorship of scholarly articles established
What was missing
- Original contributions · While originality established, major significance not demonstrated; letter lacked specifics and spoke to potential rather than actual impact
- Final merits · Does not meet requirement for sustained national or international acclaim at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Participation as judge of work of others established |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Authorship of scholarly articles established |
 Original contributions | Not met | While originality established, major significance not demonstrated; letter lacked specifics and spoke to potential rather than actual impact |
 Leading or critical role | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; Director found two criteria met; AAO declined to address remaining claimed criterion |
 Final merits | Not met | Does not meet requirement for 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.