Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1ABusiness and managementIndividualDecided October 2020Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

OCT192020_03B2203

Leading or critical roleMetAwardsNot metPublished materialNot metCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedJudgingClaimed, not analyzedMembershipClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

Business executive and consulting company CEO seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner claimed four criteria beyond leading role already established by Director. AAO found only leading role criterion met, rejected awards and published material claims, and concluded insufficient evidence of placement among top of field.

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

  • Leading or critical role · President and CEO role at distinguished consulting company constitutes leading role

What was missing

  • Awards · Runner-up magazine prize and local women's award lack national or international recognition in field
  • Published material · Articles submitted do not demonstrate sufficient published material about petitioner in major media
  • Final merits · One criterion met insufficient; evidence does not establish petitioner among upper echelon of field

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
Leading or critical roleMetPresident and CEO role at distinguished consulting company constitutes leading role
AwardsNot metRunner-up magazine prize and local women's award lack national or international recognition in field
Published materialNot metArticles submitted do not demonstrate sufficient published material about petitioner in major media
Commercial successClaimed, not analyzedCriterion not analyzed or claimed in decision
ExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedCriterion not analyzed or claimed in decision
High salaryClaimed, not analyzedCriterion claimed but not analyzed due to insufficient other criteria met
JudgingClaimed, not analyzedCriterion not analyzed or claimed in decision
MembershipClaimed, not analyzedCriterion not analyzed or claimed in decision
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedCriterion claimed but not analyzed due to insufficient other criteria met
Scholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedCriterion not analyzed or claimed in decision
Final meritsNot metOne criterion met insufficient; evidence does not establish petitioner among upper echelon 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.