Date of Decision: October 11, 2023
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Gender, Diversity, and Inclusion Specialist
Field: Business
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner has performed in a leading or critical role for an organization with a distinguished reputation. Specifically, she has held significant positions within several agencies of the United Nations, contributing to various projects in the field of gender, diversity, and inclusion.
Criteria Not Met:
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner claimed to have reviewed advertising campaign submissions at the Ad Venture Student Competition 2018-2019. However, the evidence provided did not sufficiently demonstrate that she actually completed the judging of the work of others in the same or allied field.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
While the petitioner has contributed to professional publications and has experience in the field, the provided letters and documents did not convincingly show that her contributions were of major significance in the broader field of gender, diversity, and inclusion. The contributions were recognized within specific UN agencies but lacked evidence of widespread impact.
High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner submitted evidence of her salary as a “Digital Partnerships Manager.” However, the provided salary data was compared to different roles rather than similar positions in the same field. Therefore, the petitioner did not demonstrate that her salary was high relative to others in her field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
No evidence was provided to demonstrate the petitioner’s receipt of major, internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner has co-authored several publications, including annual reports for the UN. However, these publications did not receive citations or significant recognition within the broader field, thus not meeting the criterion of original contributions of major significance.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s work involved research and reporting on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on women and girls, and partnerships to promote STEM and digital literacy skills for girls. However, the significance of these contributions on the broader field remains unproven.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner’s claim of judging advertising campaigns for the Ad Venture Student Competition lacked corroborating evidence of actual participation and completion of the judging tasks.
Membership in Associations:
No specific memberships were highlighted or deemed sufficient to meet the criteria for extraordinary ability.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner’s publications were not sufficiently recognized as being of major significance in the field.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner’s salary data did not adequately compare to others in the same specific field, failing to demonstrate a high salary criterion.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
No evidence was provided to meet this criterion.
Supporting Documentation
- Emails and Documents Related to Judging: Emails indicating intent to judge but lacking proof of completion.
- Recommendation Letters: Letters from colleagues and supervisors attesting to the petitioner’s contributions within the UN.
- Salary Evidence: Documentation of the petitioner’s salary compared to unrelated positions.
- Publication Evidence: Reports and publications co-authored by the petitioner with limited citation impact.
Conclusion
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not meet at least three of the required criteria for extraordinary ability classification. The evidence provided did not convincingly demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that she is among the small percentage at the very top of her field of endeavor.
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed. The petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility as an individual of extraordinary ability.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering more robust evidence, particularly demonstrating major contributions and higher remuneration directly comparable to others in the same field, before reapplying or appealing further.
