Date of Decision: July 28, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Assistant Professor of Computer Science
Field: Computer Science
Nationality: Chinese
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Authorship of scholarly articles:
The petitioner provided evidence of publishing two articles in Data & Knowledge Engineering and Lecture Notes in Computer Science. - Participation as a judge of the work of others:
The petitioner reviewed three papers for the NSF/NIJ Intelligence and Security Informatics Symposium and an article for Information Sciences.
Criteria Not Met:
- Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards:
The petitioner’s evidence of attending the MLabNet 2001 Seminar and the NSF grant supporting his participation did not meet the requirement of being recognized as a prize or award for excellence. - Original contributions of major significance:
The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that his work had a major impact on the field. The provided citation history and digital access data were insufficient to prove major significance. - Leading or critical role performed:
The petitioner did not provide adequate evidence of performing in a leading or critical role for distinguished organizations.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner failed to provide convincing evidence that attending the MLabNet 2001 Seminar constituted an award or prize for excellence in his field.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
No significant publications or media coverage about the petitioner that met the evidentiary requirements were presented.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s work, while original, did not demonstrate the level of impact or influence required to be considered of major significance in the field of computer science.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner successfully demonstrated his role as a peer reviewer for multiple academic papers, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner’s membership in IEEE and IEEE Computer Society was noted, but these memberships alone did not demonstrate the required critical role in distinguished organizations.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner published in reputable journals, meeting the criterion of authorship of scholarly articles.
Leading or Critical Role:
Insufficient evidence was provided to establish that the petitioner performed in a leading or critical role for a distinguished organization.
Supporting Documentation
- Invitation Letter to MLabNet 2001 Seminar:
- A letter from the petitioner’s Ph.D. advisor inviting him to participate, indicating expenses would be covered by an NSF grant.
- NSF Grant Documentation:
- Details of the grant supporting participation in the seminar.
- Peer Review Documentation:
- Evidence of reviewing papers for the NSF/NIJ Symposium and Information Sciences.
- Published Articles:
- Copies of articles published in Data & Knowledge Engineering and Lecture Notes in Computer Science.
- Citation Data:
- Citation history and access data for the petitioner’s published works.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The appeal was dismissed as the petitioner did not meet the initial evidence requirements and failed to demonstrate the sustained national or international acclaim required for the EB1 classification.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not establish receipt of a major award or meet at least three of the ten regulatory criteria. The evidence provided did not support claims of extraordinary ability or significant impact in the field.
Next Steps:
It is recommended that the petitioner consider strengthening their evidence, particularly in demonstrating original contributions of major significance, and potentially reapplying with more comprehensive documentation.
