EB-1 Extraordinary Ability USCIS Appeal Review – Executive from Israel – AUG312023_01B2203

Date of Decision: August 31, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability

Petitioner Information

Profession: Executive
Field: Machine Learning Software
Nationality: Israeli

Summary of Decision

Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied

Evidentiary Criteria Analysis

Criteria Met:

1. Participation as a judge of the work of others: The petitioner served as a judge for various works related to his field.
2. Original contributions of major significance: The petitioner claimed to have revolutionized the field of mineral discovery with his machine learning platform.
3. Leading or critical role for distinguished organizations or establishments: He served as vice president of research and development and CEO for notable companies in his field.

Criteria Not Met:

1. Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards: The petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence that his awards were recognized for excellence in his field.
2. Authorship of scholarly articles: The petitioner did not contest the Director’s conclusions regarding this criterion.
3. High remuneration for services: The petitioner did not contest the Director’s conclusions regarding this criterion.

Key Points from the Decision

Awards and Prizes Won:

• Summary of Findings: The petitioner provided evidence of awards received during military service, but these were not sufficiently documented to show they were for excellence in the intended field of endeavor.
• Key Quotes or References: “The petitioner has not documented his receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in his intended field of endeavor.”

Original Contributions of Major Significance:

• Summary of Findings: The petitioner’s contributions to machine learning in mineral discovery were acknowledged by colleagues but lacked independent, objective evidence of major significance.
• Key Quotes or References: “The petitioner’s machine learning methods have potential but lack documented evidence of significant impact in the field.”

Participation as a Judge:

• Summary of Findings: The petitioner served as a judge in various capacities, but the evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate the significance of this participation.
• Key Quotes or References: “The evidence does not show the extent to which the petitioner’s judging roles have been recognized as significant in the field.”

Membership in Associations:

• Summary of Findings: Not specifically addressed in the decision.
• Key Quotes or References: N/A

Leading or Critical Role Performed:

• Summary of Findings: The petitioner held significant positions in his field, but the evidence did not establish that these roles were critical or leading to the degree required for EB1 classification.
• Key Quotes or References: “The petitioner’s roles, while important, do not meet the high threshold of leading or critical roles as defined for extraordinary ability classification.”

Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:

• Summary of Findings: Not contested on appeal.
• Key Quotes or References: N/A

Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:

• Summary of Findings: Not applicable.
• Key Quotes or References: N/A

Supporting Documentation

• News Articles: Provided about the petitioner’s awards but not directly related to his field of expertise in machine learning.
• Letters from Colleagues: Confirmed the petitioner’s contributions but lacked objective evidence of major significance.
• Patent Application: Cited but not shown to have significant commercial impact.

Conclusion

Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the required evidentiary criteria to demonstrate extraordinary ability. The documentation provided did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or that the petitioner is among the small percentage at the top of his field.

Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering additional objective evidence to support the claimed criteria or explore other visa classifications that might be more appropriate for his qualifications.

Download the Full Petition Review Here.