Date of Decision: December 19, 2017
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Attorney, Mediator, Journalist, and Author
Field: Multilingual Mediation and Journalism
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging the Work of Others: The petitioner served as a mentor, critiquing and evaluating the performance of other mediators, meeting the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv).
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner authored an article published in a professional publication, satisfying the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi).
Criteria Not Met:
Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner served as a volunteer mediator for various organizations, but the evidence did not establish that he performed in a leading or critical role. While he handled many cases and received praise for his work, this did not demonstrate that he held a leading or critical position within the organizations.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: The petitioner did not provide evidence comparing his earnings to others in his field to demonstrate that he commanded a high salary.
Published Material: The petitioner provided articles related to his work, but did not demonstrate that these appeared in major media or professional publications. One article primarily discussed a company rather than focusing on the petitioner.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable in this case.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner provided articles related to his work, but these did not appear in major media or professional publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field of mediation or journalism.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner mentored and evaluated other mediators, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Not applicable in this case.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner authored an article published in a professional publication, meeting this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that he held a leading or critical role in organizations with distinguished reputations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable in this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner did not compare his earnings to others in his field to demonstrate that he commanded a high salary.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
- Certificates and Awards: Not provided in the record.
- Articles and Publications: Articles related to the petitioner’s work, but not shown to be in major media or professional publications.
- Letters of Support: Letters from colleagues and supervisors praising the petitioner’s work as a mediator.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the required criteria for EB-1 classification. Despite notable achievements, the petitioner did not establish the level of extraordinary ability required. Additionally, the petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate a leading or critical role or major contributions to the field.
Next Steps: The petitioner should consider reapplying with additional evidence or exploring other visa categories that may better suit his qualifications and achievements.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
