Date of Decision: May 3, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Businessman and Scientist
Field: Release Film and Membrane Coating Technology
Nationality: Chinese
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Authorship of scholarly articles: The petitioner has authored scholarly articles that were published in professional journals.
Criteria Not Met:
- Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards: The petitioner submitted evidence of company accolades but failed to demonstrate personal receipt of recognized awards.
- Membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements: The petitioner’s memberships did not require outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international experts.
- Original scientific or business-related contributions of major significance: The petitioner failed to show that his contributions have been of major significance in the field.
- Leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation: The petitioner played a leading role in his company, but the company did not have a distinguished reputation.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- The petitioner’s company received several awards and certificates, primarily at a provincial level, which were not recognized as significant at a national or international level.
Membership in Associations:
- The associations the petitioner was involved with did not require achievements that were recognized by national or international experts in the field.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- The petitioner’s contributions, including patents, did not demonstrate a significant impact or advancement in the field.
Leading or critical role performed:
- While the petitioner had a leading role in his company, the evidence did not establish that the company had a distinguished reputation.
Supporting Documentation
- Scholarly articles published in professional journals.
- Certificates of High and New Technology Product.
- Letters from industry professionals and executives.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed due to insufficient evidence meeting the necessary criteria for extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner failed to establish eligibility for the classification as required by USCIS standards.
Reasoning: The evidence provided did not adequately demonstrate that the petitioner met at least three of the required evidentiary criteria. The achievements were not sufficiently recognized as impactful at the national or international level.
Next Steps: It is recommended that the petitioner gathers more substantial evidence that directly connects his contributions and roles to recognized standards of extraordinary ability.
