EB-1AComputer science and AIEmployerDecided October 2024Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
OCT242024_01B2203
JudgingMetLeading or critical roleMetHigh salaryNot metMembershipNot metOriginal contributionsNot metPublished materialNot metAwardsClaimed, not analyzedCommercial successClaimed, not analyzedExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Software company petitioned for senior director of professional services under EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met two of ten initial criteria. AAO upheld rejection of membership, published material, original contributions, and high salary criteria due to insufficient documentation of field-wide impact and recognition.
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 beneficiary met this criterion; AAO did not disturb finding.
- Leading or critical role · Director found beneficiary met this criterion; AAO did not disturb finding.
What was missing
- High salary · Compensation in 2021-2022 not shown to be high relative to others in field.
- Membership · Advisory board memberships lack evidence of outstanding achievement as judged by recognized national or international experts.
- Original contributions · Work on company program and partnerships lacks demonstrated major significance to the field overall.
- Published material · Podcast interview does not qualify as published material in professional, major trade publication, or major media.
- Final merits · Beneficiary met only two criteria; three required minimum. Record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Director found beneficiary met this criterion; AAO did not disturb finding. |
 Leading or critical role | Met | Director found beneficiary met this criterion; AAO did not disturb finding. |
 High salary | Not met | Compensation in 2021-2022 not shown to be high relative to others in field. |
 Membership | Not met | Advisory board memberships lack evidence of outstanding achievement as judged by recognized national or international experts. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Work on company program and partnerships lacks demonstrated major significance to the field overall. |
 Published material | Not met | Podcast interview does not qualify as published material in professional, major trade publication, or major media. |
 Awards | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or discussed in decision. |
 Commercial success | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or discussed in decision. |
 Exhibitions | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or discussed in decision. |
 Scholarly articles | Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or discussed in decision. |
 Final merits | Not met | Beneficiary met only two criteria; three required minimum. Record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.