Date of Decision: February 18, 2015
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Lawyer
Field: Law
Nationality: (Not specified)
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
None
Criteria Not Met
Criterion 1: The Master of Business Administration degree postdated the filing of the petition and did not demonstrate future employment as an educator.
Criterion 2: Participation in international law workshops did not change the proposed occupation from lawyer to educator.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
Not applicable.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
Not applicable.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
Not applicable.
Participation as a Judge
Not applicable.
Membership in Associations
The email correspondence between the petitioner and a representative did not demonstrate that the petitioner has satisfied the plain language requirements of the membership criterion at 8 C.F.R § 204.5(h)(3)(ii).
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
Not addressed.
Leading or Critical Role Performed
The 2013 Policy Recommendations for the Next Mayor from the Bar did not name or cite the petitioner, thus not demonstrating a leading or critical role.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration
Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
Master of Business Administration Degree: The degree postdated the filing of the petition and did not demonstrate future employment as an educator.
International Law Workshop Participation: The interest in a 2009 workshop and post-filing participation in a 2011 workshop did not change the proposed occupation from lawyer to educator.
Email Correspondence: Did not satisfy the membership criterion at 8 C.F.R § 204.5(h)(3)(ii).
2013 Policy Recommendations: Did not demonstrate a leading or critical role for the petitioner.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reopen is dismissed, and the petition remains denied.
Reasoning
The petitioner did not address and overcome each of the issues discussed in the most recent decision. The petitioner failed to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought, meeting none of the criteria required for extraordinary ability.
Next Steps
The petitioner may consider filing a new petition with comprehensive evidence addressing all regulatory criteria or consulting with an immigration attorney for further guidance.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
