Date of Decision: November 28, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Business Owner
Field: Printing and Packaging, with an emphasis on UV-LED printing technology
Nationality: Chinese
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner satisfied this criterion by demonstrating authorship of scholarly articles in the field.
- Published Material About the Individual: The Petitioner provided sufficient evidence of published material in professional or major media about her contributions.
Criteria Not Met:
- Membership in Associations: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements.
- Original Contributions of Major Significance: While the Petitioner has made original contributions, the evidence did not demonstrate that these contributions are of major significance in the field.
- Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner did not provide adequate evidence to show she performed in a leading or critical role for distinguished organizations.
- High Salary or Remuneration: The Petitioner failed to demonstrate her salary was significantly high in comparison to others in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
The Petitioner did not submit any evidence of major internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
The Petitioner provided articles that appeared in national publications. However, the tone of the articles was promotional rather than journalistic, which diminished their evidentiary value.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
While the Petitioner has developed patented technology and software relating to UV-LED printing, the documentation did not convincingly establish the major significance of these contributions.
Participation as a Judge
The Petitioner did not claim or provide evidence for this criterion.
Membership in Associations
The Petitioner’s claimed membership in the GPA was not sufficiently supported by evidence demonstrating it met the regulatory requirements.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
The Petitioner satisfied this criterion by providing evidence of scholarly articles she authored.
Leading or Critical Role
The Petitioner’s role as a general manager and as a chief expert did not sufficiently demonstrate a leading or critical role within distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
Not applicable to this petition.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration
The Petitioner’s salary combined with bonuses was compared to average industry salaries but did not convincingly demonstrate a significantly high remuneration relative to others in the field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
Not applicable to this petition.
Supporting Documentation
- Letters of Recommendation: Various letters from professionals in the field were submitted to support the Petitioner’s claims.
- Patents and Publications: Copies of patents and articles authored by the Petitioner were provided.
- Salary Documentation: Proof of personal income and industry salary survey reports were included.
- Media Coverage: Articles published in national media were submitted as evidence of the Petitioner’s recognition.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not meet the burden of proof to establish eligibility by demonstrating extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim. The evidence provided did not sufficiently meet at least three of the ten regulatory criteria required.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider submitting additional evidence or reevaluating the criteria claimed to better align with the regulatory requirements. Consulting with an immigration attorney for further guidance could also be beneficial.
