Date of Decision: October 3, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Attorney and Managing Partner
Field: Transnational Corporate Law
Nationality: Brazilian
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner provided evidence of his authorship of scholarly articles in his field.
Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner demonstrated that he held a leading or critical role within his organization, a Brazilian law firm.
Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others: The Petitioner served on multiple Ph.D. dissertation committees, evaluating topics such as “The Import Tax Incidence Matrix Rule” and “Participative Tax Law: Administrative Transaction and Arbitration of Tax Obligation.”
Criteria Not Met:
The document does not specify which additional criteria were not met, focusing instead on the ones that were met and reviewed.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
No awards or prizes were mentioned or provided as evidence in the document.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
No specific published materials about the Petitioner were provided or mentioned in the document.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
No original contributions of major significance were provided or mentioned in the document.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner served on Ph.D. dissertation committees, evaluating significant and complex legal topics.
Membership in Associations:
No membership in associations was provided or mentioned in the document.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner authored scholarly articles in the field of transnational corporate law.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The Petitioner held a leading role in a Brazilian law firm, demonstrating significant influence and responsibility.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
No artistic exhibitions or showcases were provided or mentioned in the document.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
No evidence of high salary or remuneration was provided or mentioned in the document.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
No commercial successes in the performing arts were provided or mentioned in the document.
Supporting Documentation
- Evidence of the Petitioner’s participation in Ph.D. dissertation committees, evaluating topics such as “The Import Tax Incidence Matrix Rule” and “Participative Tax Law: Administrative Transaction and Arbitration of Tax Obligation.”
- Proof of the Petitioner’s authorship of scholarly articles in his field.
- Documentation of the Petitioner’s leading or critical role within his law firm.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The decision of the Director was withdrawn and the case was remanded for further review.
Reasoning: The Petitioner met the criteria for participation as a judge of the work of others, which overcame the initial ground for denial. A final merits determination will be conducted to evaluate the totality of the evidence.
Next Steps: The Director must perform a final merits determination to assess the Petitioner’s eligibility for the extraordinary ability classification based on the Kazarian framework.
