Date of Decision: September 28, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Materials Scientist
Field: Materials Science
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a judge of the work of others:
The Petitioner served as a peer reviewer of manuscripts, a common academic activity.
Authorship of scholarly articles:
The Petitioner authored several journal articles, including highly cited works in journals with high impact factors.
Original contributions of major significance:
The Petitioner’s work impacted guidelines from the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention regarding filtration and disinfection methods during the COVID-19 crisis.
Criteria Not Met:
Not explicitly listed, but the petition failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim necessary for the final merits determination.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable as no major, internationally recognized award was presented.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner’s work was recognized through high citation counts in specific articles. However, this alone did not establish the required sustained acclaim.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner’s research had significant implications for public health and clean energy, contributing to guidelines by major health organizations.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner’s activity as a peer reviewer was considered routine and not indicative of extraordinary ability.
Membership in Associations:
Not mentioned in the document.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner authored multiple articles, some of which were highly cited and published in high-impact journals.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The record did not clearly establish the Petitioner’s individual prominence in his field, despite collaborations with prominent researchers.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not mentioned in the document.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The Petitioner provided partial copies of 11 journal articles, a Google Scholar citation report, and letters from co-authors and colleagues.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that he was among the very top of his field. The contributions, though significant, did not meet the stringent requirements for EB1 extraordinary ability classification.
Next Steps:
The Petitioner may consider alternative visa classifications that do not require the same level of evidence for extraordinary ability.
