Date of Decision: May 21, 2021
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Human Resources and Labor Researcher, Professor
Field: Business Administration
Nationality: Taiwanese
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging: The petitioner served as a reviewer for the International Journal of Information Management and as a thesis examiner.
Scholarly Articles: The petitioner authored several scholarly articles in professional publications.
Criteria Not Met:
Nationally or Internationally Recognized Awards: The petitioner provided evidence of various academic and research awards, but did not demonstrate that these awards are nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field.
Published Materials in Major Media: The petitioner submitted articles from various Chinese publications, but these were not about her work specifically and lacked evidence of being major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: Although the petitioner provided reference letters and citation records, the evidence did not demonstrate that her contributions have had a major impact on the field.
High Salary: The petitioner provided salary information but did not establish that her earnings were significantly higher than others in her field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner received multiple awards for academic research and teaching but did not prove their national or international significance.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Articles from Chinese publications were submitted, but these were primarily about events she participated in and not specifically about her work.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Reference letters and citation counts were provided, but the evidence did not show that her work has had a major impact on the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner judged manuscripts for a professional journal and served as a thesis examiner.
Membership in Associations:
No relevant information provided.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner authored several scholarly articles, which were acknowledged.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
No relevant information provided.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner’s salary was compared to national averages but was not shown to be significantly high relative to others in her field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
Awards Documentation: Included various academic and research awards.
Published Materials: Articles from United Daily News, Apple Daily (Taiwan), Commercial Times, and China Times.
Reference Letters: Letters from colleagues and mentors praising the petitioner’s research contributions.
Salary Documentation: Individual Income Tax Statement and salary comparisons.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the required evidentiary criteria to demonstrate extraordinary ability. While some criteria were satisfied, the evidence provided for others did not establish national or international acclaim or major significance in the field.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of nationally or internationally recognized awards, significant contributions to the field, and higher relative remuneration if reapplying.
