EB-1ASoftware engineeringIndividualDecided October 2020Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
OCT142020_03B2203
Scholarly articlesMetJudgingNot metLeading or critical roleNot metPublished materialNot metOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Software developer specializing in Internet technologies with nearly twenty years of experience claimed five criteria but met only scholarly articles. AAO dismissed, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or placement among 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
- Scholarly articles · Petitioner submitted multiple scholarly articles published in professional publications in software and Internet technology field.
What was missing
- Judging · Insufficient documentation; two letters alone insufficient to establish petitioner meets all elements of judging criterion.
- Leading or critical role · Petitioner did not establish employers had distinguished reputation or that his role contributions were of significant importance to organizations' outcomes.
- Published material · Two newspaper articles about petitioner from March 2019 in The China Press did not qualify as major media in the United States.
- Final merits · Record shows successful career but lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim; recent publications and limited judging instances insufficient for top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Scholarly articles | Met | Petitioner submitted multiple scholarly articles published in professional publications in software and Internet technology field. |
 Judging | Not met | Insufficient documentation; two letters alone insufficient to establish petitioner meets all elements of judging criterion. |
 Leading or critical role | Not met | Petitioner did not establish employers had distinguished reputation or that his role contributions were of significant importance to organizations' outcomes. |
 Published material | Not met | Two newspaper articles about petitioner from March 2019 in The China Press did not qualify as major media in the United States. |
 Original contributions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but petitioner did not contest Director's determination; issue waived on appeal. |
 Final merits | Not met | Record shows successful career but lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim; recent publications and limited judging instances insufficient for top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.