Date of Decision: September 26, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Attorney
Field: Law, Geology, and Oil & Gas Exploration
Nationality: Kazakhstan
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Criterion 1: The petitioner provided extensive documentation demonstrating sustained national and international acclaim in the field of law, particularly in oil and gas exploration.
- Criterion 2: Evidence of significant contributions in advising U.S. investors in Kazakhstan’s oil and gas sector, showcasing her expertise in both law and geology.
- Criterion 3: Documentation of her advanced education and successful application of technical knowledge in a professional setting.
Criteria Not Met:
- Criterion 1: The Director did not provide an analysis on whether the petitioner met the initial evidentiary requirements or demonstrated extraordinary ability.
- Criterion 2: The Director concluded that the petitioner’s work as an attorney did not fall within the purview of sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings: The document did not provide specific details about any awards or prizes won by the petitioner.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings: The decision lacks detailed references to published materials specifically about the petitioner.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of findings: The petitioner has made notable contributions by advising U.S. investors in Kazakhstan, using her dual expertise in law and geology.
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of findings: There was no specific mention of the petitioner’s participation as a judge in the provided document.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings: The document did not include details on the petitioner’s membership in professional associations.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Summary of findings: No information on scholarly articles authored by the petitioner was included in the document.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Summary of findings: The petitioner’s leading role in advising on oil and gas exploration projects highlights her significant contributions.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings: Not applicable to the petitioner’s case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings: The document does not provide evidence of the petitioner receiving a high salary or remuneration.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of findings: Not applicable to the petitioner’s case.
Supporting Documentation
- Legal Opinion Paper: Provided by the Office of General Counsel, supporting the argument that extraordinary ability in business does not exclude the petitioner from qualifying for EB-1 classification.
- Notice of Intent to Deny: Issued by the Director, stating that the petitioner’s profession did not fall within the required fields.
- Appeal Brief: Submitted by the petitioner, asserting her profession’s alignment with the arts and sciences.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The decision of the Director is withdrawn, and the case is remanded for further proceedings.
Reasoning: The Director did not sufficiently analyze whether the petitioner’s area of expertise falls within the required fields. The petitioner’s documentation meets initial evidence requirements and warrants further consideration.
Next Steps: The petitioner may submit additional evidence to support her position. The Director will issue a new decision based on the further analysis.
