Date of Decision: MAY 05 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:
Judging the Work of Others: The petitioner met the judging criterion by serving as an additional representative to a consulting association.
Criteria Not Met:
Significance of Role with Association: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence regarding the significance of his role within the association.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The petitioner failed to demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field of law.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: There was no sufficient documentation provided showing published materials about the petitioner.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner did not provide evidence of authorship of scholarly articles in the field of law.
Membership in Associations: The petitioner did not establish membership in associations that require outstanding achievements.
Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner did not prove a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation.
Awards and Prizes Won: There were no significant awards or prizes documented to support the petitioner’s claim of extraordinary ability.
High Salary or Remuneration: The petitioner did not submit evidence showing a high salary or other significant remuneration.
Commercial Successes: The petitioner did not demonstrate commercial successes in the performing arts or any other relevant field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of winning significant awards or prizes.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
No substantial documentation was submitted to prove the existence of published materials about the petitioner.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner failed to demonstrate any original contributions of major significance in the field of law.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner did meet the judging criterion through his role as an additional representative in a consulting association.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not provide evidence of membership in associations that require outstanding achievements.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
There was no evidence of the petitioner’s authorship of scholarly articles in the field of law.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner did not establish that he performed a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
This criterion was not applicable to the petitioner’s field of law.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner did not provide documentation showing a high salary or significant remuneration.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
This criterion was not applicable to the petitioner’s field of law.
Supporting Documentation
- Judging the Work of Others: Evidence of the petitioner’s role as an additional representative to a consulting association was provided but lacked details on the significance of the role.
- Published Materials: Insufficient documentation was provided regarding published materials about the petitioner.
- Original Contributions: Lack of evidence supporting the claim of original contributions of major significance.
- Authorship: No evidence of scholarly articles authored by the petitioner.
- Membership in Associations: No substantial proof of membership in notable associations.
- High Salary: No evidence provided showing a high salary or significant remuneration.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The petition remains denied.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not meet the necessary evidentiary criteria required to establish extraordinary ability under the EB-1 category. The evidence submitted was insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or to prove significant contributions to the field of law.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering additional evidence to support the claims of extraordinary ability or explore other immigration options. It is recommended to consult with an immigration attorney for further guidance.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
