Date of Decision: April 29, 2020
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Human and Environmental Rights Educator
Field: Education
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
Judging Competitions: The Petitioner participated as part of an examination board judging term papers and evaluating teachers.
Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner held various leading positions within educational and social services organizations.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner authored scholarly articles in professional publications.
Criteria Not Met
Awards and Prizes: The Petitioner did not provide evidence of significant national or international awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: The provided media coverage was local and did not meet the criteria for national or international acclaim.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner’s contributions were not demonstrated to be of major significance in her field.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: No evidence provided.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: Not applicable.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Summary of findings: The media coverage cited the Petitioner in her capacity as a representative, but did not focus on her achievements.
Key quotes or references: Not specified.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Summary of findings: Letters of recommendation praised the Petitioner’s work but did not provide sufficient evidence of major significance.
Key quotes or references: The letters speculated on potential future influence rather than demonstrating current significant impact.
Participation as a Judge:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner judged student term papers and teacher evaluations, but this did not demonstrate the required level of extraordinary ability.
Key quotes or references: Not specified.
Membership in Associations:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner authored several articles and books, but the significance of these publications was not established.
Key quotes or references: Limited citations of the Petitioner’s work did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Summary of findings: The Petitioner’s professional roles were documented, but did not demonstrate widespread acclaim or recognition.
Key quotes or references: Reference letters did not show significant attention or acclaim from the broader field.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Supporting Documentation
Motion of Applause: The Petitioner received a local municipal award, which did not demonstrate national or international recognition.
Recommendation Letters: Praised the Petitioner’s work but lacked specific details and corroborating evidence of major significance.
Media Articles: Included quotes from the Petitioner, but did not focus on her achievements or provide significant recognition.
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 that meet at least three of the ten criteria. The record does not support a finding of the required acclaim and recognition for the classification sought.
Next Steps: The Petitioner must provide more substantial and specific evidence to meet the criteria for extraordinary ability classification.
