Date of Decision: May 6, 2021
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Business Executive
Field: Managing International Engineering and Manufacturing Enterprises in the Energy Industry
Nationality: [Nationality not specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner served in executive positions, including as CEO, at distinguished organizations in the energy industry.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations: The Petitioner claimed membership in the board of trustees of Saudi Arabia’s National Power Academy (NPA) and as a representative at the American Petroleum Institute (API). However, these were not deemed qualifying memberships as they did not meet the requirement of being judged by recognized national or international experts in their disciplines.
Published Material About the Petitioner: The Petitioner submitted various articles, but these did not appear in professional or major trade publications. Many were promotional materials or lacked necessary author credit and were considered insufficient.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner provided evidence of delivering presentations at conferences, but there was no evidence of these resulting in published scholarly articles in professional or trade publications.
High Remuneration: The Petitioner presented salary information, but the data did not convincingly demonstrate that his salary was significantly high in relation to others in his field, as required.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
No awards or prizes were listed as evidence.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Many articles were promotional or lacked necessary credibility to be considered major media publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The criterion for original contributions of major significance was claimed but not sufficiently demonstrated in the final decision.
Participation as a Judge:
This criterion was not mentioned in the appeal.
Membership in Associations:
The memberships cited did not meet the required standards.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner failed to provide evidence of published scholarly articles.
Leading or Critical Role:
The Petitioner was recognized for serving in critical executive roles, but this alone was not enough to meet the extraordinary ability classification.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The salary evidence was deemed insufficient to establish extraordinary ability.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
Board of Trustees Membership: Documentation of the Petitioner’s role at the NPA and API.
Articles and Media Coverage: Various articles and media coverage, though deemed insufficient.
Conference Presentations: Evidence of conference presentations without corresponding scholarly articles.
Salary Data: Printouts from Glassdoor, considered inadequate for proving high remuneration.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten criteria required for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. While the Petitioner demonstrated a leading role, the other criteria were not convincingly met.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence that meets the specific requirements of the evidentiary criteria or explore other visa options that might be more appropriate for their qualifications and achievements.
