Outcome: Dismissed
OCT282021_01B2203
Our summary
A medical consultant and former hospital department director in China claimed extraordinary ability through publications, citations, and peer review. The AAO found she met only two of ten criteria and dismissed the appeal, concluding her work did not demonstrate the sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.
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 · Petitioner performed peer review for scholarly journals
- Published material · Over 80 published articles with nearly 600 cumulative citations
What was missing
- Original contributions · Publication in high-impact journals alone does not demonstrate major significance
- Final merits · Petitioner lacks sustained national or international acclaim at top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Petitioner performed peer review for scholarly journals | |
| Met | Over 80 published articles with nearly 600 cumulative citations | |
| Not met | Publication in high-impact journals alone does not demonstrate major significance | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision | |
| Not met | Petitioner lacks 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.
