Date of Decision: DEC 8, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Business Executive
Field: Business Management
Nationality: Chinese
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
1. Published Material About the Petitioner:
The petitioner submitted evidence of published materials in professional publications about his work in the business management field. This criterion was initially contested by the Director but later accepted upon further review and submission of original magazine issues establishing the authenticity and professional nature of the publications.
2. Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner demonstrated that he performed in a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation. The Director and the appellate review both confirmed this criterion was met based on the evidence provided.
Criteria Not Met:
1. Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner provided letters and news articles regarding his managerial contributions and company successes. However, he did not sufficiently demonstrate that his contributions had a major significance in the business management field as a whole. The evidence did not show how his work introduced new methods or generated widespread interest in the field.
2. High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner claimed high annual incomes and provided tax records and compensation surveys to support his claims. However, inconsistencies in the tax records and a lack of credible explanation for these discrepancies led to the conclusion that he did not reliably establish that he commanded a high salary in relation to others in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner submitted articles published in four Chinese magazines from 2020 to 2022, which were related to his work in business management. These materials were initially doubted but later accepted as authentic and from professional publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Despite the petitioner’s claims and supporting letters, the evidence did not demonstrate significant impact on the business management field as a whole. The petitioner did not show how his work introduced new strategies or gained widespread recognition in the field.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner provided inconsistent income tax records, which undermined the credibility of his claimed earnings. The Director noted discrepancies in the amounts of taxes paid, and the petitioner’s explanation did not resolve these inconsistencies, leading to the conclusion that he did not demonstrate a high salary relative to others in his field.
Supporting Documentation
- Original Issues of Professional Magazines: Provided to establish the authenticity of published materials about the petitioner.
- Letters from Former Supervisors and Business Leaders: Submitted to support claims of original contributions, though ultimately found insufficient.
- Tax Records and Compensation Surveys: Provided to demonstrate high salary, but inconsistencies and lack of credible explanation rendered them unreliable.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed, and the petition’s denial was affirmed.
Reasoning: The petitioner met two of the required three evidentiary criteria but failed to establish a third criterion. Specifically, the petitioner did not demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the business management field or reliably establish a high salary.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering additional credible evidence and resolving inconsistencies in documentation before reapplying or exploring other visa categories.
