Date of Decision: APR. 8, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Lawyer
Field: Chinese Intellectual Property Law, Unfair Competition, and International Trade Law
Nationality: Chinese
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Criterion 1: The petitioner has demonstrated expertise in business specifically in the field of Chinese intellectual property law and international trade law.
- Criterion 2: Engagement in strategic planning and business development for U.S. and Chinese companies.
- Criterion 3: Managing lawyer at a Chinese law firm and partner at an American firm based in Beijing.
Criteria Not Met:
- Criterion 1: Lack of a major, internationally recognized award.
- Criterion 2: Insufficient evidence at initial filing that met the alternative regulatory criteria specified in the immigration law.
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 was instrumental in developing strategic business initiatives between U.S. and Chinese companies, though this did not meet the threshold of ‘extraordinary ability’ under the initial USCIS review.
Participation as a Judge: Not applicable.
Membership in Associations: Not applicable.
Authorship of scholarly articles: Not applicable.
Leading or critical role performed: Played a critical role in planning and expanding business operations for his firms in China and the U.S.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: Not applicable.
Commercial successes in the Performing Arts: Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Legal opinions and advisory letters detailing the petitioner’s role and expertise.
- Documentation of business strategies and plans developed by the petitioner.
- Correspondences supporting the petitioner’s significant role in his field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The case has been remanded for further review to assess if the petitioner meets the criteria of extraordinary ability based on newly submitted evidence and a reevaluation of existing documents.
Reasoning: The AAO found that the initial decision may not have fully considered the petitioner’s contributions and roles within the scope of business.
Next Steps: The petitioner should provide additional evidence as requested by USCIS to support the claim of extraordinary ability in business.
