Date of Decision: OCT. 24, 2022
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Lawyer
Field: Business
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Awards and Prizes: The petitioner demonstrated recognition for her extraordinary business and academic achievements in intellectual property protection, particularly within the e-commerce sector.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: Published articles focused on the petitioner’s work for online businesses, highlighting her expertise and impact in the field of intellectual property within e-commerce.
Participation as a Judge: The petitioner served as a judge in various capacities, providing expert opinions and evaluations in business-related legal contexts, especially intellectual property.
Membership in Associations: The petitioner was an active member of professional associations related to business law and intellectual property protection.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The documentation did not sufficiently demonstrate that the petitioner’s contributions were of major significance beyond her immediate professional environment.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: Although there were publications about the petitioner, there was a lack of substantial evidence showing her authorship of scholarly articles in prestigious journals.
Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner’s roles, while significant, were not adequately substantiated as being critical or leading within a larger organizational or industry-wide context.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
The petitioner has received several recognitions and awards related to her work in business law and intellectual property protection.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
There are multiple publications discussing the petitioner’s impact and expertise in online business law.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The evidence did not convincingly show the petitioner’s contributions as being of major significance to the field at large.
Participation as a Judge
The petitioner has served in judging capacities, evaluating business and intellectual property matters.
Membership in Associations
The petitioner holds memberships in various professional associations relevant to her field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
There was insufficient evidence to support the petitioner’s authorship of influential scholarly articles.
Leading or Critical Role
The documentation did not sufficiently establish the petitioner’s roles as leading or critical.
Supporting Documentation
- Letter of Support from Business Managers: Summarized the petitioner’s business and academic achievements and highlighted her role in intellectual property protection within e-commerce.
- Published Articles: Featured the petitioner’s work and impact in the field of online business law.
- Professional Association Memberships: Provided details on the petitioner’s active involvement in relevant business law associations.
- Judging Participation Documentation: Included records of the petitioner’s roles as a judge in various business-related legal contexts.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Remanded for further review
Reasoning: The appeal found that the petitioner’s occupation as a lawyer does not automatically bar her from classification as a noncitizen of extraordinary ability. The petitioner’s work relates to business, fulfilling the statutory field requirement. The case was remanded to determine if she meets the regulatory criteria for extraordinary ability.
Next Steps: The petitioner should ensure that the additional evidence provided on remand sufficiently addresses all the required criteria and demonstrates her sustained national or international acclaim in the field.
