Date of Decision: June 9, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Pharmacology Researcher
Field: Pharmacology
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a judge of the work of others: The Petitioner has participated in peer review activities.
Authorship of scholarly articles: The Petitioner has authored scholarly articles in the field of pharmacology.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards: The awards listed by the Petitioner did not meet the necessary criteria for being recognized as national or international prizes for excellence.
Membership in associations that require outstanding achievements: The Petitioner’s memberships did not demonstrate the required level of outstanding achievement judged by recognized experts.
Original contributions of major significance: The Petitioner’s contributions were not shown to have major significance in the field.
Leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments: The Petitioner did not demonstrate having a leading or critical role within organizations of distinguished reputation.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won: The Petitioner claimed six qualifying prizes and awards, but they did not meet the regulatory requirements.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: The Petitioner’s publications were acknowledged but did not meet the required significance.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The contributions were not demonstrated to have a major impact on the field.
Participation as a Judge: The peer review activities were routine and did not signify extraordinary ability.
Membership in Associations: The memberships did not meet the criteria for requiring outstanding achievements.
Authorship of scholarly articles: The articles were recognized but not deemed sufficient for establishing extraordinary ability.
Leading or critical role performed: The roles were not shown to be leading or critical within distinguished organizations.
Supporting Documentation
Various documents and evidence were provided but did not meet the necessary criteria to establish extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The evidence provided did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or place the Petitioner at the very top of the field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner did not meet the criteria for extraordinary ability, and the appeal was dismissed.
