Date of Decision: November 12, 2024
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Civil Engineer
Field: Civil Engineering and Transportation Infrastructure
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
The petitioner sought to meet at least three of the ten regulatory criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). Upon review, the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) determined that the petitioner met only one criterion, and the appeal was dismissed.
Criteria Met:
- Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others:
- The petitioner provided evidence of evaluating research papers and reviewing projects in transportation engineering, satisfying this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
- Membership in Associations:
- Membership in the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) was cited. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
- Published Material About the Petitioner:
- Articles from The Globee and NewsBreak.com were deemed insufficient, as they lacked credibility and did not meet the regulatory standards of professional or major trade media.
- Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- Letters describing the petitioner’s transportation projects lacked sufficient detail and corroboration to establish major significance in the field.
- High Salary or Remuneration:
- The petitioner’s salary data was found to be average relative to peers in the same field, and additional compensation could not be verified as significantly high.
Key Points from the Decision
Membership Evidence:
- Membership in ASCE did not meet the evidentiary standard of requiring outstanding achievements judged by experts.
Published Material Evidence:
- Articles were promotional or lacked proper validation, and the media sources were not substantiated as major or professional publications.
Contribution Evidence:
- Letters discussing project designs and innovations did not demonstrate field-wide influence or major significance.
Salary Evidence:
- Data submitted was average relative to regional and national wage statistics for civil engineers, failing to meet the standard for high remuneration.
Final Merits Determination:
- The AAO concluded that the petitioner’s work and achievements, while commendable, did not rise to the level of extraordinary ability as defined under the regulatory framework.
Supporting Documentation
Judging Evidence: Records of reviewing projects and research in transportation engineering.
Membership Evidence: Certificate of membership in ASCE.
Published Material Evidence: Articles from The Globee and NewsBreak.com, deemed insufficient.
Contribution Evidence: Letters of support discussing transportation projects.
Salary Evidence: Payroll records and wage data comparisons.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner failed to meet at least three regulatory criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or recognition required for EB-1 classification.
