Date of Decision: May 30, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Entrepreneur
Field: Healthcare Delivery
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Published Material at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii):
The petitioner provided several articles in major media about his work and co-founding of a healthcare company. This criterion was satisfied as the articles were published in professional or major trade publications and major media.
Leading or Critical Role at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii):
The petitioner served as the co-founder and CEO of the healthcare company, which has a distinguished reputation. This criterion was met, as verified by the evidence of the petitioner’s leading role.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v):
The petitioner provided letters and articles indicating the potential impact of his healthcare model. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that his contributions have already had a major significance in the field of healthcare delivery.
High Salary or Remuneration at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix):
The petitioner initially claimed eligibility under this criterion but did not continue to do so on appeal. The record did not support a finding that he met this criterion.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner provided several articles in major media that discussed his work and co-founding of a healthcare company. This satisfied the criterion for published material.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s contributions were discussed in terms of their potential impact, but the evidence did not establish that these contributions have already had a major significance in the field of healthcare delivery.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Membership in Associations:
Not discussed in the decision.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable based on the provided evidence.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner’s role as co-founder and CEO of a healthcare company with a distinguished reputation met the criterion for a leading or critical role.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner did not continue to claim this criterion on appeal, and the evidence did not support a finding that he met this criterion.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The petitioner provided several pieces of evidence, including:
Several articles in major media about his work and co-founding of a healthcare company.
Letters and documents verifying his role as co-founder and CEO.
Letters and articles discussing the potential impact of his healthcare model.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not submit sufficient evidence to meet the initial criteria required for EB1 Extraordinary Ability classification. While the petitioner demonstrated some recognition and a leading role, the evidence did not establish that his contributions had a major significance in the field or that he met the required number of criteria.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider consulting with new legal counsel to explore any further options for appeal or other immigration benefits for which he may be eligible.
