Date of Decision: January 12, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Entrepreneur and Business Development Executive
Field: Business Development
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Published Material about the Petitioner (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii)):
The petitioner provided evidence of published material about him. However, the provided documentation did not demonstrate the national or international significance of the awards and recognition claimed.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)):
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that his awards were nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field of endeavor.
Membership in Associations Requiring Outstanding Achievements (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ii)):
The petitioner submitted membership documentation from associations, but it did not indicate that the selection process required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv)):
The petitioner did not provide specific evidence demonstrating that he participated as a judge of the work of others in the field, either individually or on a panel.
Leading or Critical Role for Distinguished Organizations (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii)):
The petitioner claimed to have performed in leading roles, but the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the organizations had a distinguished reputation.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
Summary of Findings:
The petitioner’s “Award” did not meet the criteria for nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence in his field. The promotional material and coverage in newspapers did not establish the required significance.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
Summary of Findings:
While there was coverage in various media outlets, the significance of the published material did not rise to the level of national or international recognition required for this criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
Summary of Findings:
The appeal did not address this criterion adequately. As the petitioner did not fulfill the initial requirement of meeting three criteria, this aspect was not evaluated further.
Participation as a Judge
Summary of Findings:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of formal participation as a judge in the field.
Membership in Associations
Summary of Findings:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that his memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Leading or Critical Role Performed
Summary of Findings:
Evidence provided did not establish that the organizations the petitioner worked with had a distinguished reputation.
Supporting Documentation
- Articles and Media Coverage: Summarized various articles and media mentions.
- Membership Diplomas: Provided membership documentation but lacked the necessary criteria.
- Award Promotional Material: Included promotional material for awards but failed to establish their significance.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not meet the required evidentiary criteria to demonstrate extraordinary ability as defined under the applicable regulations. The provided documentation was insufficient to establish the petitioner’s national or international acclaim in the field of business development.
Next Steps:
It is recommended that the petitioner gather more robust evidence that meets the regulatory criteria, particularly focusing on the national or international significance of awards, and memberships requiring outstanding achievements, as well as formal participation as a judge in the field.
