Date of Decision: October 1, 2015
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Interventional Radiologist
Field: Sciences
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Participation as a Judge: The petitioner submitted evidence of the beneficiary’s peer review duties for a publication.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The beneficiary authored several scholarly articles published in journals, including the Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
- High Salary or Remuneration: The petitioner demonstrated that the beneficiary’s salary is high compared to others in the wider field of medicine.
Criteria Not Met:
- Original Contributions of Major Significance: The support letters did not demonstrate that the beneficiary’s work had a significant impact beyond his employer and patients.
- Leading or Critical Role: The evidence did not reflect that the beneficiary performed in a leading role or that his duties were critical to the success of the hospital.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
Not applicable.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
Not applicable.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The petitioner did not satisfy the plain language requirements of this criterion. The support letters generally discussed the beneficiary’s success with his own patients and the potential for a wider use of his techniques, rather than demonstrating a broader impact in the field.
Participation as a Judge
The petitioner documented a single instance of peer review for one publication, which did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.
Membership in Associations
Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
The petitioner demonstrated that the beneficiary authored scholarly articles, but the dissemination of these articles did not indicate national or international acclaim.
Leading or Critical Role
The petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary performed in a leading or critical role that was indicative of national or international acclaim.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration
The petitioner demonstrated that the beneficiary’s salary is high compared to physicians and surgeons in general, but not specifically compared to interventional radiologists.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Peer Review Duties: Documentation of the beneficiary’s peer review duties.
- Scholarly Articles: Copies of the beneficiary’s scholarly articles published in various journals.
- Salary Information: Evidence of the beneficiary’s salary and comparison with other medical professionals.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed. The petitioner did not establish that the beneficiary had achieved sustained national or international acclaim or that he is one of the small percentage who has risen to the very top of his field.
Reasoning: The evidence did not demonstrate that the beneficiary’s achievements set him significantly above almost all others in his field at a national or international level.
Next Steps: The petitioner may seek other forms of evidence or consider different visa categories if applicable.
