Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
EB-1AEnergy and climateIndividualDecided September 2025Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

SEP172025_02B2203

High salaryMetLeading or critical roleMetAwardsNot metPublished materialNot metOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

Executive in sustainable energy technology with prior O-1 status claims extraordinary ability under EB-1A. AAO found petitioner met high salary and leading role criteria but rejected the petition because evidence of publications, awards, and other accomplishments did not establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field over her career.

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

  • High salary · Remuneration significantly higher than chief executive salaries in comparable regions
  • Leading or critical role · Service center found criterion met; decision did not disturb this finding

What was missing

  • Awards · No major internationally recognized award; honors were second-place or commendations only
  • Published material · Eleven articles over three years lack sustained acclaim and citation impact over twenty-year career
  • Final merits · Evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
High salaryMetRemuneration significantly higher than chief executive salaries in comparable regions
Leading or critical roleMetService center found criterion met; decision did not disturb this finding
AwardsNot metNo major internationally recognized award; honors were second-place or commendations only
Published materialNot metEleven articles over three years lack sustained acclaim and citation impact over twenty-year career
Original contributionsClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; decision reserved determination
Scholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed; decision reserved determination
Final meritsNot metEvidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top 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.