Date of Decision: OCT. 2, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Foreign Trade Executive
Field: International Trading
Nationality: Brazil
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging the Work of Others:
In 2013, the petitioner performed as a judge for a project developed by an international organization, fulfilling the criterion of judging the work of others.
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner has been employed in a leading role for CECIEx, an international trading company in Brazil. This role involved significant responsibilities and contributions to the company’s operations and strategic direction.
Criteria Not Met:
Awards and Prizes:
The petitioner provided evidence of several awards received by their company, but the Director determined these awards were not nationally or internationally recognized as required by the regulation. Additionally, the awards were not directly awarded to the petitioner but to the company.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner claimed membership in the Council for Import and Export Companies (CECIEx) as a criterion. However, the evidence did not establish that CECIEx requires outstanding achievements for its members, judged by recognized national or international experts.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The submitted articles focused on projects and only mentioned or quoted the petitioner. They did not specifically highlight the petitioner’s work in a manner that fulfills the criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The recommendation letters and supporting documentation did not provide sufficient evidence of the petitioner’s contributions being of major significance in the field of foreign trade.
High Salary or Remuneration:
The provided financial documents did not demonstrate that the petitioner earned a salary or other remuneration that was significantly high in relation to others in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner’s evidence regarding various awards did not meet the regulatory criteria as it did not establish national or international recognition.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The articles submitted were about projects rather than specifically about the petitioner’s work and achievements.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The letters and documents provided did not sufficiently demonstrate that the petitioner’s contributions were of major significance to the field of foreign trade.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner’s role as a judge in 2013 for an international project met the criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner’s membership in CECIEx did not meet the criterion as the organization did not require outstanding achievements judged by national or international experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
No evidence was provided to fulfill this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner played a leading role in CECIEx, which was recognized as a criterion met.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner’s financial documentation did not demonstrate significantly high remuneration compared to others in the field.
Supporting Documentation
- Award Certificates: Certificates for various awards received by the company, not directly by the petitioner.
- Membership Documentation: Documents showing membership and positions held in CECIEx.
- Recommendation Letters: Letters from colleagues and industry experts discussing the petitioner’s work.
- Published Articles: Articles mentioning the petitioner in the context of projects.
- Financial Documents: Income tax returns and wage data comparing the petitioner’s earnings to national averages.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a one-time major achievement or documents fulfilling at least three of the ten criteria. The overall evidence did not support the claim of sustained national or international acclaim or that the petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor.
Next Steps:
Petitioners are encouraged to provide more substantial and specific evidence to demonstrate their eligibility for the EB-1 classification. This includes clear documentation of national or international recognition, evidence of original contributions of major significance, and significantly high remuneration compared to others in the field.
