Date of Decision: January 19, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Electrical Engineer
Field: Electrical Insulator Technology
Nationality: [Nationality Not Provided]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner satisfied this criterion by providing evidence of their role as a judge in evaluating the work of others in their field.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner met this criterion by presenting scholarly articles they authored, demonstrating their contribution to the field.
- Published Material About the Petitioner: Initially not accepted by the Director, this criterion was met upon appeal. The Petitioner provided interviews published in major media discussing their work on electrical insulator technology.
Criteria Not Met:
- Lesser Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that the awards they received were of a sufficient caliber to meet this criterion.
- Membership: The Petitioner could not establish that their memberships in associations met the regulatory standards.
- Original Contributions of Major Significance: The initial decision did not find the Petitioner’s contributions to be of major significance in their field.
- Other Criteria: The remaining criteria were not discussed in detail as the Petitioner only needed to satisfy three criteria to proceed.
Key Points from the Decision
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- The Petitioner provided two media interviews, which were initially deemed insufficient. However, upon appeal, it was recognized that one of the interviews, published on the INews Network with over 46 million daily unique visitors, satisfied the criterion.
Participation as a Judge:
- Evidence was provided showing the Petitioner’s role as a judge, which was accepted by the Director and reaffirmed on appeal.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- The Petitioner presented articles they authored, which were recognized as significant contributions to the field of electrical engineering.
Supporting Documentation
- Interview on Evening News: Discussed safe use of electricity during thunderstorms.
- Interview on INews Network: Focused on preventing electrical transmissions from thunderstorms and had substantial reach and audience.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The decision was remanded for further review.
Reasoning: The Petitioner met three of the required criteria; however, a final merits determination is necessary to assess the totality of the evidence and establish extraordinary ability in the field of electrical engineering.
Next Steps: The case has been remanded to the Texas Service Center for a new decision, considering the final merits of the Petitioner’s accomplishments.
This decision highlights the rigorous standards set by USCIS for EB1 Extraordinary Ability petitions and underscores the importance of comprehensive documentation to substantiate claims of extraordinary ability.
