Date of Decision: January 29, 2025
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Data Analytics Leader
Field: Data Science and Analytics
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Motion Outcome: Motion to reopen and reconsider dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
- Judging the Work of Others (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv)): Evidence of participation as a judge in competitions and panels was accepted.
- Leading or Critical Role (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii)): Petitioner served in leadership positions, including Associate Vice President, Head of Analytics and Data Science.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi)): Authored at least one article in a qualifying publication.
Criteria Not Met
- Membership in Associations (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii)): Fellow and senior memberships in BCS and IEEE obtained in 2023 were recognized but not sufficient to show sustained acclaim.
- High Salary or Remuneration (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix)): Evidence reviewed but did not establish extraordinary standing.
Key Issues on Motion
- Sustained Acclaim Not Established: Most evidence dated only from 2021–2023, concentrated shortly before filing, failing to prove long-term recognition.
- Judging Evidence: Participation in judging panels in 2023 lacked documented selection standards showing recognition of top-level acclaim.
- Membership Evidence: While membership required demonstrating achievements, the recognition itself occurred only in 2023.
- New Evidence on Motion: Included promotion letters, online article comments, LinkedIn invitations, speaking engagements, and post-filing awards. These reflected growing recognition but not yet sustained national or international acclaim.
Key Points from the Decision
- Short Timeframe of Recognition: Achievements clustered in the year of filing (2023), insufficient for “sustained” acclaim.
- Employer Letters Insufficient: Contributions recognized internally but not broadly in the field.
- Judging Panels Not Proven Selective: No evidence that selection was based on national or international reputation.
- Membership Timing: Senior/fellow memberships awarded in 2023 could not establish longstanding acclaim.
- Post-Filing Evidence: Not persuasive in showing acclaim as of the filing date.
Final Merits Determination
Although the petitioner satisfied three criteria, the AAO concluded that the record did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or that the petitioner belonged to the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Supporting Documentation
- Judging Evidence: 2023 participation in international competitions.
- Leadership Evidence: Senior roles at a global consumer technology company since 2017, with higher leadership since 2021.
- Authorship Evidence: Articles in data science publications in 2023.
- Membership Evidence: BCS Fellowship and IEEE Senior Membership (2023).
- Additional Evidence: Promotion and offer letters, reader comments, speaking invitations, and post-filing awards.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Motions to reopen and reconsider dismissed.
Reasoning: Petitioner met three criteria but failed to demonstrate sustained acclaim or top standing in the field as required under EB-1.
