Date of Decision: June 17, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Business Executive
Field: Pharmaceutical Industry
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Published Material about the Petitioner:
The petitioner submitted evidence of a 2019 online article about her, published in a major media outlet. This was accepted as meeting the criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
- Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish the national or international significance of the awards received. - Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not prove that the membership in the claimed associations required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. - Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that her business-related contributions were widely recognized outside her organization as having a major impact on the field. - High Salary or Other Significantly High Remuneration:
The petitioner did not provide comparative evidence of her remuneration relative to others in her field, particularly in the context of her work outside the United States.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- The petitioner’s awards were not established as nationally or internationally significant.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- An article published in a major media outlet was accepted as meeting one criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- The petitioner’s contributions were significant to her employer but not shown to have a broader impact on the field.
Participation as a Judge:
- Not applicable or insufficient evidence provided.
Membership in Associations:
- The petitioner’s memberships did not meet the required standards for proving outstanding achievements.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- Not applicable or insufficient evidence provided.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
- The petitioner’s role as Managing Director was acknowledged, but the broader impact on the industry was not demonstrated.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- The petitioner did not provide adequate comparative salary data.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
- Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Article: A 2019 article about the petitioner in a major media outlet.
- Awards: Certificates and descriptions of the petitioner’s awards, lacking evidence of their broader significance.
- Memberships: Documentation of memberships in associations, lacking evidence of the selection criteria based on outstanding achievements.
- Letters of Recommendation: Various letters supporting the petitioner’s claims, but lacking sufficient independent and objective evidence.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
- The petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria.
- The petitioner’s work did not demonstrate the required level of sustained national or international acclaim.
Next Steps:
- The petitioner may consider reapplying with additional evidence or seek legal advice for further actions.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
Cite as Matter of G-M-, ID# 20612257
JUN172022_01B2203
