Date of Decision: January 28, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Clinical Investigator
Field: Medical Science
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Authorship of scholarly articles: The petitioner demonstrated authorship of scholarly articles in the field of medical science, satisfying one of the necessary criteria.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in associations: The petitioner provided evidence related to membership in a professional organization, but it did not meet the requirements set forth in the regulations.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of awards and prizes that are recognized as nationally or internationally significant in the field of medical science.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
The petitioner submitted various documents; however, the published materials did not establish the necessary recognition of extraordinary ability in the field.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The evidence provided by the petitioner did not substantiate claims of original contributions that have had a significant impact on the field of medical science.
Participation as a Judge
No evidence was submitted to demonstrate the petitioner’s participation as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field.
Membership in Associations
The petitioner’s membership claims were reviewed but found to be insufficient to meet the required standards for this criterion.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
The petitioner successfully demonstrated authorship of scholarly articles, which is one of the ten criteria listed. However, meeting only one criterion is insufficient for approval.
Leading or Critical Role Performed
The petitioner did not provide adequate evidence of performing a leading or critical role in distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
This criterion was not applicable as it does not pertain to the petitioner’s field.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration
No evidence was provided to support claims of a high salary or remuneration in relation to others in the field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
This criterion was not applicable as it does not pertain to the petitioner’s field.
Supporting Documentation
The petitioner submitted various documents, including scholarly articles, membership evidence, and pages from the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) Manual. However, these were not sufficient to meet the required criteria for the EB-1 classification.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motions to reconsider and reopen were denied.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the requirements for at least three criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). The new evidence submitted was not sufficient to overturn the previous decision.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider providing additional evidence to meet the required criteria or exploring alternative visa classifications if eligible.
