Date of Decision: JULY 23, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Mathematician
Field: Mathematics
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Participation as a judge: The petitioner has conducted reviews for various mathematical journals, fulfilling this criterion.
- Authorship of scholarly articles: The petitioner met this criterion based on articles published in respected mathematical journals.
Criteria Not Met:
- Awards: The petitioner submitted evidence of awards and fellowships, which were not considered nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field.
- Membership in associations: Membership in the American Mathematical Society and other associations did not require outstanding achievements, failing to meet the criterion.
- Original contributions of major significance: The evidence did not demonstrate that the petitioner’s contributions had significant impact on the field of mathematics.
- Leading or critical role: There was no evidence indicating that the petitioner’s roles at various educational institutions were considered leading or critical in nature.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner’s awards were primarily academic and institutional, which were not recognized as prestigious or significant enough in the broader field of mathematics.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
While the petitioner has been published, the impact and recognition of her work within the academic community were considered insufficient to demonstrate extraordinary ability.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The contributions, while valuable, were not shown to have significantly influenced the field of mathematics on a national or international level.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner’s participation in peer reviews for academic journals was acknowledged and met one of the criteria for extraordinary ability.
Membership in Associations:
The associations listed did not have requirements that aligned with the regulatory criteria for demonstrating extraordinary ability through membership.
Authorship of scholarly articles:
The petitioner’s authorship met the criteria due to the recognition of her scholarly articles in the field.
Supporting Documentation
- Reviews and editorial contributions to mathematical journals
- Documentation of awards and fellowships
- Membership records for mathematical societies
- Scholarly articles and citation reports
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed as the petitioner did not meet the required number of criteria demonstrating extraordinary ability in the field of mathematics.
Reasoning: The evidence provided did not sufficiently prove that the petitioner’s achievements were recognized nationally or internationally as extraordinary.
Next Steps: It is recommended for the petitioner to gather more substantial evidence of her impact and recognition in the field if considering future applications.
