Date of Decision: February 15, 2022
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Mathematical Researcher
Field: Financial Management
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
Judging the Work of Others: The Beneficiary participated in reviewing five papers for three journals and two conferences. However, it was not established that these instances place the Beneficiary among the small percentage at the very top of his field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Beneficiary authored three journal articles and four conference papers. The documentation provided was not sufficient to demonstrate that the Beneficiary’s publication record is consistent with having a career of acclaimed work and sustaining national or international acclaim.
Leading or Critical Role: The Beneficiary served as a research fellow and lecturer at a university and has been employed as a mathematical researcher since 2019. The documentation provided did not demonstrate national or international acclaim from these positions.
High Salary or Remuneration: The record reflects the Beneficiary’s income; however, the documentation provided was not sufficient to establish that the Beneficiary commands earnings commensurate with sustained national or international acclaim.
Criteria Not Met
Awards and Prizes Won: No major, internationally recognized award was claimed or established.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: Insufficient evidence was provided to demonstrate that the Beneficiary’s work has garnered significant national or international attention.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The evidence did not establish that the Beneficiary’s work has had a significant impact on the field.
Participation as a Judge: The Beneficiary reviewed five papers, but the documentation did not show how this experience compares to others at the very top of the field.
Membership in Associations: No documentation was provided to show significant membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: Not applicable.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
The Beneficiary did not provide evidence of receiving a major, internationally recognized award, which is a key requirement for demonstrating extraordinary ability.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
The documentation did not demonstrate significant national or international acclaim through published materials about the Beneficiary’s work.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The evidence provided did not show that the Beneficiary’s work has significantly influenced the field.
Participation as a Judge
While the Beneficiary participated in reviewing papers, it was not established that this placed him among the small percentage at the very top of his field.
Membership in Associations
No significant memberships were demonstrated that would require outstanding achievements.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
The Beneficiary authored several papers, but the significance and impact of these publications were not sufficiently demonstrated.
Leading or Critical Role Performed
The Beneficiary held positions as a research fellow and lecturer, but the documentation did not show national or international acclaim from these roles.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration
The Beneficiary’s income was documented but did not establish that he commands earnings commensurate with sustained national or international acclaim.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The Petitioner provided letters from colleagues and documentation of the Beneficiary’s publications, income, and professional roles. However, the evidence was not sufficient to meet the high standard required for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The documentation provided did not demonstrate that the Beneficiary has sustained national or international acclaim and is among the small percentage at the top of his field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of the Beneficiary’s national or international acclaim and reapplying or seeking other visa classifications.
