Date of Decision: June 8, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Chairman and General Manager
Field: [Not Specified]
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner established that he holds a senior leadership role in [Company Name] and provided sufficient documentation to demonstrate the company’s distinguished reputation in its industry, satisfying the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii).
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that the awards listed were received by him personally or that they are nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not provide evidence that the associations he is a member of require outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The articles submitted were primarily about the petitioner’s company, not about him. The evidence did not establish that the publications were major trade publications or other major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that his contributions were widely implemented or remarkably influential in the field.
High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner did not provide comparative evidence to demonstrate that his salary or total remuneration is significantly high relative to others in his field and geographic area.
Key Points from the Decision
Leading or Critical Role
The petitioner established his senior leadership role in his company and provided documentation to demonstrate the company’s distinguished reputation.
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards
The petitioner listed several awards, but they were granted to his company rather than him personally. Additionally, the awards did not qualify as nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field.
Membership in Associations
The petitioner claimed membership in several associations but did not provide evidence that these memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
The petitioner provided articles from Henan Daily and other sources, but these articles were primarily about his company, not him. The publications were not established as major trade publications or other major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The petitioner submitted letters and patents but did not demonstrate how these contributions were of major significance in the field.
High Salary or Remuneration
The petitioner provided his income details but did not provide comparative evidence to show that his salary or total remuneration is significantly high compared to others in his field.
Supporting Documentation
Leading Role: Organizational charts, company documentation, and letters of recommendation.
Awards: Award certificates and descriptions.
Memberships: Membership certificates and association letters.
Published Materials: Articles and publication information.
Original Contributions: Patents, letters of reference, and technical descriptions.
Salary: Income certificates, tax returns, and company financial information.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is 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 success and recognition in his field, he did not establish the sustained national or international acclaim necessary for the EB1 classification.
Next Steps:
Consider gathering more substantial and relevant evidence to support the criteria not met.
Seek further guidance or legal advice on potential reapplication or other visa classifications that may be more appropriate for the petitioner’s qualifications and achievements.
