EB-1AHealthcare, clinicalIndividualDecided October 2022Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
OCT212022_01B2203
JudgingMetLeading or critical roleMetMembershipMetOriginal contributionsMetPublished materialMetScholarly articlesMetAwardsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A radiologist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification met the threshold evidentiary criteria but failed the final merits determination. The AAO found that while the petitioner demonstrated substantial accomplishments and institutional affiliations, the evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of nuclear medicine.
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 concluded petitioner satisfied this criterion
- Leading or critical role · Director concluded petitioner satisfied this criterion
- Membership · Director accepted; petitioner disputed but AAO affirmed not meeting this criterion
- Original contributions · Director concluded petitioner satisfied this criterion
- Published material · Director accepted; petitioner disputed but AAO affirmed not meeting this criterion
- Scholarly articles · Director concluded petitioner satisfied this criterion
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award; must satisfy alternate criteria instead
- Final merits · Petitioner failed to show sustained national or international acclaim; recognition limited to early career stage, not top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director concluded petitioner satisfied this criterion |
 Leading or critical role | Met | Director concluded petitioner satisfied this criterion |
 Membership | Met | Director accepted; petitioner disputed but AAO affirmed not meeting this criterion |
 Original contributions | Met | Director concluded petitioner satisfied this criterion |
 Published material | Met | Director accepted; petitioner disputed but AAO affirmed not meeting this criterion |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Director concluded petitioner satisfied this criterion |
 Awards | Not met | No major internationally recognized award; must satisfy alternate criteria instead |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner failed to show sustained national or international acclaim; recognition limited to early career stage, not top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.