Date of Decision: MAR. 3, 2022
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Financial Specialist
Field: Finance
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: Leading or critical role
The Petitioner was recognized for serving in a leading or critical role within his organization.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: Membership in associations
The Petitioner claimed membership based on participation in industry roundtables. However, he did not provide specific membership or invitation requirements for these roundtables, nor did he demonstrate that membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Criterion 2: Participation as a judge
The Petitioner asserted his role in recruitment as evidence of judging the work of others. The documentation did not establish how recruiting activities equated to judging others’ work within the same or allied fields.
Criterion 3: Original contributions of major significance
The Petitioner provided letters praising his work but failed to show evidence of contributions with major significance in the field. The contributions mentioned were specific to his employers and did not demonstrate wider influence or impact.
Criterion 4: Authorship of scholarly articles
The Petitioner submitted business documents authored on behalf of his employer. These documents were not shown to be published in professional or major trade publications or other major media.
Criterion 5: High salary or remuneration
The Petitioner’s salary was above average but did not reach the threshold of being considered a high salary compared to others in his field.
Criterion 6: Commercial successes in the performing arts
The Petitioner did not qualify under this criterion as it pertains to the performing arts, and he did not submit relevant evidence.
Comparable Evidence:
The Petitioner did not adequately explain why he could not meet at least three of the specified criteria, nor did he demonstrate how his evidence was truly comparable to the required criteria.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable. The Petitioner did not claim to have won major internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The decision did not find substantial published material about the Petitioner meeting the required standards.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show that his contributions had significant impact beyond his immediate employers.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner’s role in recruitment was not deemed equivalent to judging the work of others in the field.
Membership in Associations:
The evidence provided did not meet the criterion of membership requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The documents submitted by the Petitioner were not shown to be published in appropriate venues.
Leading or critical role performed:
The Petitioner was recognized for his leading or critical role within his organization, which was the only criterion met.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The Petitioner’s salary was above average but did not qualify as significantly high.
Commercial successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Membership Evidence: Letters from colleagues and evidence of participation in industry roundtables.
- Judging Evidence: Letters documenting recruitment activities.
- Contributions Evidence: Letters from employers and colleagues.
- Scholarly Articles: Business documents authored for employer.
- Salary Evidence: Pay stubs and comparative salary data.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or documents satisfying at least three of the ten criteria. The Petitioner’s evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition in the field of endeavor.
Next Steps:
The Petitioner may consider submitting additional or different evidence to meet the required criteria or explore other visa options.
