Date of Decision: May 20, 2024
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: International Consultant
Field: Strategic Communications and Global Development
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Withdrawn and remanded for further determination
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Original Contributions of Major Significance: Evidence demonstrated that the petitioner made original contributions recognized as significant in the field.
- Leading or Critical Role: Documentation confirmed that the petitioner performed in leading or critical roles for organizations with distinguished reputations.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: On appeal, the petitioner provided evidence of co-authoring a scholarly article published in International Annals of Criminology in 2018.
Criteria Not Met:
- Display of Work: The Director determined the evidence was insufficient to satisfy this criterion, though the petitioner provided comparable evidence on appeal.
- High Salary or Remuneration: The petitioner claimed a high salary but did not sufficiently document remuneration relative to peers in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner submitted letters from industry experts attesting to the significant impact of his contributions in global development and communications strategies.
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner provided evidence of leadership roles in high-profile organizations, supported by detailed letters confirming the distinguished reputations of these entities.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
On appeal, the petitioner successfully demonstrated co-authorship of a scholarly article published in a professional journal, satisfying this criterion.
Display of Work:
The Director found the evidence insufficient for this criterion; however, the petitioner’s appeal included comparable evidence for reconsideration.
High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner’s evidence of earnings lacked sufficient comparative data or corroborating documentation to establish it as significantly high in the field.
Supporting Documentation
Original Contributions Evidence: Letters from experts detailing significant contributions in the field.
Leadership Evidence: Documentation of critical roles in distinguished organizations.
Authorship Evidence: Scholarly article co-authorship demonstrated through journal excerpts and supporting letters.
Display Evidence: Comparable documentation submitted on appeal but not fully evaluated.
Salary Evidence: Incomplete documentation of comparative remuneration in the industry.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The Director’s decision was withdrawn, and the matter was remanded for further evaluation and a final merits determination.
Reasoning:
The petitioner met at least three of the regulatory criteria. A final merits determination is required to assess whether the petitioner has achieved sustained national or international acclaim and ranks among the small percentage at the top of their field.