Date of Decision: March 19, 2021
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Cancer Researcher
Field: Cancer Research
Nationality: [Not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Approved
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others:
The petitioner has participated in the review and evaluation of the work of peers within the scientific community, demonstrating recognition by peers in the field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner has authored multiple scholarly articles published in reputable, high-impact journals.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
While the petitioner’s work has been published and cited, it has not been demonstrated as having major significance in the field of cancer research. The citations provided did not convincingly show that the contributions were of extraordinary impact.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable as the petitioner did not claim any major internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner’s work was published in high-ranking journals, indicating a standard of quality but not necessarily extraordinary impact.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s work, while valuable, did not show evidence of significant impact in changing cancer treatment protocols or improving survival rates. The evidence provided did not demonstrate that the contributions were of major significance within the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner served as a judge of the work of others, meeting one of the criteria for extraordinary ability.
Membership in Associations:
Not claimed or discussed in detail as part of the criteria met.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner has authored several scholarly articles, with citations in reputable journals. However, the impact of these articles was not sufficient to demonstrate extraordinary ability.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Not claimed or discussed in detail as part of the criteria met.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable to the field of cancer research.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not claimed or discussed in detail as part of the criteria met.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable to the field of cancer research.
Supporting Documentation
Membership Documentation: Provided but insufficient to demonstrate outstanding achievements.
Scholarly Articles: Met the criterion, but the impact on the field was not demonstrated as extraordinary.
Contribution Letters: Detailed the petitioner’s work but did not establish the major significance of the contributions.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed (Revocation of Approval Affirmed)
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the required criteria for extraordinary ability. The contributions cited, while significant, were not demonstrated to be of major impact in the field of cancer research. The memberships did not demonstrate outstanding achievements judged by experts.
Next Steps:
It is recommended that the petitioner review the evidentiary requirements for EB1 classification and gather more relevant documentation. The petitioner might also consider alternative immigration pathways if their qualifications do not meet the stringent criteria of extraordinary ability in their field.
This structured summary highlights the key aspects of the USCIS appeal review decision, providing a clear overview of the petitioner’s background, the criteria analysis, and the final determination.
