Date of Decision: DEC. 30, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Human Resources Manager
Field: Human Resources Management
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Leading or Critical Role:
The Petitioner was found to have performed in a leading or critical role for a distinguished organization. He is currently employed as “head of people” at a financial company specializing in cryptocurrency.
High Remuneration:
The Petitioner commanded a high level of remuneration for services in relation to others in the field.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations:
The Petitioner did not establish that he is a member of any association in the field that requires outstanding achievements of its members, judged by recognized national or international experts.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner participated in the D School’s Ambassador Program, which assists in interviewing prospective graduate applicants. However, this did not meet the criterion for participation as a judge of the work of others in the field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner authored articles for “Data Driven Investor,” but these were not considered scholarly articles as they were written for the general public rather than a specialized, scholarly readership.
Published Material About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner initially claimed to have met this criterion but did not contest the Director’s finding on appeal, indicating abandonment of this issue.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Similarly, the Petitioner initially claimed this criterion but did not contest the Director’s finding on appeal, indicating abandonment of this issue.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
No evidence was provided to support this criterion.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
No additional published materials were provided to meet this criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
No new evidence or arguments were provided to satisfy this criterion.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner’s role in the D School’s Ambassador Program did not qualify as participation as a judge of the work of others in the field.
Membership in Associations:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to show membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The articles submitted were not considered scholarly, as they did not meet the defined criteria.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The Petitioner met this criterion as he is employed in a critical role within a distinguished organization.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The Petitioner met this criterion with evidence of high remuneration compared to others in the field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Leading or Critical Role: Employment records from the financial company specializing in cryptocurrency.
- High Remuneration: Evidence of salary and compensation packages.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not provide sufficient initial evidence to meet the required three of ten criteria. Specifically, he failed to provide evidence for membership in associations, participation as a judge, and authorship of scholarly articles. The appeal did not contest or rebut the Director’s findings on the abandonment of published material about the petitioner and original contributions of major significance.
Next Steps:
- The Petitioner should gather more robust evidence if considering future petitions.
- Consider obtaining documentation from recognized associations or experts to support the criteria.
