EB-1APhysics and astronomyIndividualDecided October 2024Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
OCT292024_01B2203
JudgingMetScholarly articlesMetOriginal contributionsNot metFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
An astrophysicist seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed multiple criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner met at least three initial criteria but failed the final merits determination, lacking sustained national or international acclaim and not ranking among the small percentage at the very top of the 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
- Judging · Single instance of peer review for academic journal in 2023 satisfied criterion, though insufficient for sustained acclaim overall.
- Scholarly articles · Record shows authorship of scholarly articles in professional publications.
What was missing
- Original contributions · Record does not reflect achievement of making original contributions of major significance in field.
- Final merits · Petitioner has not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim or career of acclaimed work since graduation in August 2021; position in leasing company inconsistent with maintaining astrophysics acclaim.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Judging | Met | Single instance of peer review for academic journal in 2023 satisfied criterion, though insufficient for sustained acclaim overall. |
 Scholarly articles | Met | Record shows authorship of scholarly articles in professional publications. |
 Original contributions | Not met | Record does not reflect achievement of making original contributions of major significance in field. |
 Final merits | Not met | Petitioner has not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim or career of acclaimed work since graduation in August 2021; position in leasing company inconsistent with maintaining astrophysics acclaim. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.