Date of Decision: JUNE 25, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Financier
Field: Finance
Nationality: Chinese
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Approved
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Leading or critical role: Initially determined as met by the Texas Service Center, but upon appeal, it was found that the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate a critical role that was of significant importance to the outcome of the organization’s activities.
Criteria Not Met:
Awards: The petitioner’s claim of receiving an award was found inconsistent and unverified, particularly with discrepancies in the record about the award’s details and significance.
Membership in associations: The evidence did not demonstrate that the petitioner’s memberships were based on outstanding achievements or that the associations were recognized fields of expertise related to the classification sought.
Participation as a judge: The appeal failed to resolve discrepancies regarding the petitioner’s role as a judge in a competition, and evidence did not establish significant participation.
Original contributions of major significance: The petitioner did not demonstrate that his financial contributions to various projects had a significant impact on the field of finance.
Authorship of scholarly articles: Although one article was recognized, it did not suffice to meet the requirement for multiple evidentiary criteria.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The appeal noted discrepancies in records and translations concerning an award claimed by the petitioner, leading to questions about the veracity and significance of the award.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Claims of significant contributions to finance were not supported by evidence that these had altered or influenced the field significantly.
Participation as a Judge:
Inconsistencies regarding the dates and roles in a competition disqualified this as substantial evidence.
Leading or critical role performed:
The petitioner’s claimed roles in various projects did not demonstrate a significant or leading influence on these projects’ success or operations.
Supporting Documentation
- Letters of attestation
- Certificates of awards and translations
- Documentation of project involvement and financing
- Published articles and descriptions of their professional relevance
Conclusion
Final Determination: The petitioner did not meet the required evidentiary criteria to qualify as an individual of extraordinary ability under EB-1 classification. The evidence presented did not sufficiently prove the claims of awards, memberships, or significant contributions to the field of finance.
Reasoning:
The documentation provided failed to conclusively demonstrate that the petitioner’s contributions or achievements were of substantial significance or recognition in the field of finance.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering more robust documentation or evidence that clearly demonstrates extraordinary ability according to the regulatory criteria.
