Date of Decision: May 3, 2023
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Information Technology Project Manager
Field: Information Technology
Nationality: [Nationality not provided in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Approved, then Revoked
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Judging the Work of Others: The petitioner met the criterion by judging the work of others as part of his professional responsibilities.
- Publication of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner satisfied the criterion by having scholarly articles published.
Criteria Not Met:
- Membership in Associations: The petitioner did not meet the criterion as the Senior member status of IEEE does not require outstanding achievements as judged by recognized national or international experts.
- High Remuneration: The petitioner did not meet the criterion as the evidence provided was too broad and general to establish a high salary or significant remuneration compared to others in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of major, internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner met the criterion for the publication of scholarly articles but did not provide evidence of extensive published materials about himself.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The decision does not highlight any original contributions of major significance by the petitioner.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner successfully demonstrated participation as a judge of the work of others.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not establish that his Senior member status in IEEE required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner met the criterion by having published scholarly articles.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The decision does not provide specific evidence of the petitioner performing a leading or critical role in distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
This criterion is not applicable to the petitioner’s case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner did not meet the criterion for high salary or remuneration, as the provided evidence was not specific or comparative enough.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
This criterion is not applicable to the petitioner’s case.
Supporting Documentation
- Judging the Work of Others: Evidence of the petitioner’s role in evaluating the work of peers.
- Publication of Scholarly Articles: Copies of the petitioner’s published articles.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The petition was denied.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not satisfy at least three of the ten initial evidentiary criteria required for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. The evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements and high remuneration compared to peers.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may seek to provide additional documentation or consider alternative immigration pathways that may better align with his qualifications and professional achievements.
