Date of Decision: November 30, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Cardiovascular Researcher
Field: Cardiovascular Science
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner met this criterion by demonstrating her role in peer-reviewing manuscripts for professional publications and conferences, satisfying the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv).
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner met this criterion by providing evidence of her scholarly articles published in professional journals, including Hypertension, The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, and the Journal of Cardiology, satisfying the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi).
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that her contributions were of major significance in the field. The evidence included publications and citation history but lacked detailed explanations of how her work has been widely accepted and implemented in the field to the extent that it has been regarded as contributions of major significance. The reference letters provided confirmed the originality of her research but did not elaborate on its impact, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v).
Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that she performed in a leading or critical role for distinguished organizations. The evidence included descriptions of her research activities but lacked detailed letters from individuals with personal knowledge of the significance of her roles, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii).
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner did not provide evidence of receiving nationally or internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner provided sufficient evidence of published material about her in professional or major media, satisfying this criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner’s contributions, while recognized within the academic and medical community, were not demonstrated to have major significance in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner participated as a judge in professional settings, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner authored several scholarly articles, meeting this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The Petitioner did not establish that her roles were leading or critical in distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The Petitioner provided various supporting documents, including letters of recommendation, articles, and evidence of her work. However, these did not collectively establish the required criteria for extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that she met at least three of the ten initial evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. While the Petitioner satisfied the criteria for participation as a judge and authorship of scholarly articles, the evidence provided did not establish her original contributions as of major significance or her roles as leading or critical in distinguished organizations. The totality of the evidence did not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of her field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider submitting additional evidence that clearly establishes the major significance of her contributions or explore other immigration options that may better fit her qualifications.
