EB-1 Extraordinary Ability USCIS Appeal Review – Military Scholar – MAY152018_02B2203

Date of Decision: May 15, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability

Petitioner Information

Profession: Military Scholar
Field: Education
Nationality: Not specified

Summary of Decision

Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied

Evidentiary Criteria Analysis

Criteria Met:
Authorship of Scholarly Articles at 8 C.F.R. ยง 204.5(h)(3)(vi):
The petitioner met this criterion by providing evidence of his articles published in professional or major trade publications. Specifically, he submitted articles on naval battles during World War One, published in a prestigious magazine.

Leading or Critical Role at 8 C.F.R. ยง 204.5(h)(3)(viii):
The petitioner demonstrated his role as a captain overseeing a frigate and later as a Commodore overseeing ten ships and more than one thousand officers and sailors in the Turkish Navy. This role was verified by multiple letters and a service certification from the Admiral of the Turkish Naval Forces, establishing his leadership in an organization with a distinguished reputation.

Criteria Not Met:
Published Material at 8 C.F.R. ยง 204.5(h)(3)(iii):
The petitioner provided evidence of his contributions to a documentary and several newspaper articles. However, the documentary did not focus on the petitioner, and the newspaper articles lacked full certified translations. Therefore, these did not meet the regulatory criterion for published material about the petitioner in major media.

Original Contributions at 8 C.F.R. ยง 204.5(h)(3)(v):
The petitioner claimed his four books and thirteen articles constituted contributions of major significance. However, the evidence did not demonstrate the impact of these publications on the field of military scholarship. Letters from experts referred to potential future contributions rather than past contributions of major significance.

Key Points from the Decision

Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable based on the provided evidence.

Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner was featured in several publications, but they did not meet the criteria for focusing specifically on his achievements or work due to lack of certified translations and the content not being primarily about him.

Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitionerโ€™s books and articles were recognized, but the evidence did not establish that these contributions had a significant impact on the field of military scholarship.

Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable based on the provided evidence.

Membership in Associations:
Not discussed in the decision.

Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner published articles in professional and major trade publications, meeting the criteria for authorship of scholarly articles.

Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitionerโ€™s leadership roles in the Turkish Navy were sufficiently demonstrated to meet the criteria for a leading or critical role.

Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.

Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable based on the provided evidence.

Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.

Supporting Documentation

The petitioner provided several pieces of evidence, including:

Articles published in a prestigious magazine about naval battles during World War One.
Letters and a service certification verifying his roles in the Turkish Navy.
Evidence of contributions to a documentary and newspaper articles, though these lacked certified translations.

Conclusion

Final Determination:
The appeal is dismissed.

Reasoning:
The petitioner did not submit sufficient evidence to meet the initial criteria required for EB1 Extraordinary Ability classification. Although the petitioner met two criteria, the evidence did not demonstrate a major contribution in the field of military scholarship. Consequently, the petitioner failed to establish the level of expertise required for the classification sought.

Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider consulting with new legal counsel to explore any further options for appeal or other immigration benefits for which he may be eligible.

Download the Full Petition Review Here

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *