EB-1 Extraordinary Ability USCIS Appeal Review – Medical Doctor from India – AUG022023_01B2203

Date of Decision: August 2, 2023
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability

Petitioner Information

Profession: Medical Doctor
Field: Research on Rare Diseases
Nationality: Indian

Summary of Decision

Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded

Evidentiary Criteria Analysis

Criteria Met:

1. Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner participated as a judge of others’ work.
2. Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner authored scholarly articles.
3. Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner made original scientific contributions of major significance to her field.

Criteria Not Met:

1. Receipt of National Awards: Although the Petitioner claimed to have received national awards for excellence, this criterion was not considered in the final decision.
2. Membership in Associations: The Petitioner claimed membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements, but this criterion was not considered in the final decision.

Key Points from the Decision

Awards and Prizes Won: Not explicitly addressed in the final decision due to sufficient criteria already being met.

Published Materials About the Petitioner:

• The Petitioner’s research articles were downloaded over 40,000 times, but the significance of these downloads was questioned.
• Evidence of over 120 citations from other researchers was provided, demonstrating the impact of her work.

Original Contributions of Major Significance:

• The Petitioner’s research on rare diseases has been used as guidelines by other clinicians.
• Discoveries included identifying a previously ignored contaminant causing infections and a cancer medication causing infection-like symptoms.
• Letters from other physicians praised her research, noting the significant improvements in treatment protocols and diagnostic methods as a result of her work.

Participation as a Judge:

• The Petitioner demonstrated her role in judging the work of others in her field.

Membership in Associations:

• The criterion was not reviewed due to sufficient evidence in other areas.

Authorship of Scholarly Articles:

• The Petitioner authored 34 published articles, which were extensively cited by other researchers.

Leading or Critical Role Performed:

• Not explicitly addressed in the final decision.

Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:

• Not applicable.

Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:

• Not applicable.

Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:

• Not applicable.

Supporting Documentation

• Research Publications: Evidence of over 120 citations from other researchers.
• Letters from Peers: Letters from a German professor and a doctor at a hospital, indicating the significance of the Petitioner’s research.

Conclusion

Final Determination: The Director’s decision is withdrawn, and the matter is remanded for a new decision.

Reasoning: The Petitioner demonstrated original scientific contributions of major significance and met the preliminary evidentiary requirements of the requested immigrant visa category. Further determination is required to establish whether she has extraordinary ability in her field.

Next Steps: On remand, the Director should review the entire record and determine whether the Petitioner has established herself among the small percentage who have risen to the very top of her field. The Director should then enter a new decision.

Download the Full Petition Review Here