Date of Decision: March 13, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Molecular Pathologist
Field: Immunology
Nationality: [Redacted]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Participation as a judge of others’ work: The Petitioner has participated as a judge of others’ work in the field of immunology.
- Authorship of scholarly articles: The Petitioner has authored several scholarly articles in immunology.
- Original contributions of major significance: The Petitioner has made significant original contributions to the field of immunology, particularly in immunotherapy using specific cells to counteract Graft-Versus-Host Disease (GVHD).
Criteria Not Met:
- Receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards: The Petitioner did not establish the receipt of such awards.
- Membership in associations: Not established.
- Published material about the individual: Not established.
- Evidence of the display of the individual’s work: Not established.
- Performance in a leading or critical role: Not established.
- Evidence of high salary: Not established.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner received a New Investigator Award from [Redacted] for 2022 and a Careers in Immunology Fellowship for 2021-2022.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner has published numerous articles and presented at several international conferences.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner’s research has demonstrated a significant impact in the field of immunology, particularly with his work on immunotherapy to treat GVHD. His contributions include developing methodologies to expand iNKT cells and identifying a unique regulatory subset of these cells.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner has been involved in evaluating the work of other professionals in the field.
Membership in Associations:
Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner has numerous peer-reviewed articles to his credit and has presented his research findings at international conferences.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Not applicable.
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 Papers and Publications: Documentation of the Petitioner’s extensive research and publications.
- Letters of Endorsement: Letters from distinguished scientists and professors supporting the significance of the Petitioner’s work.
- Conference Presentations: Evidence of presentations made by the Petitioner at international conferences.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Remanded for further review
Reasoning:
The Director initially denied the petition, concluding the Petitioner did not meet the required criteria. Upon appeal, it was determined that the Petitioner satisfied three criteria: participation as a judge, authorship of scholarly articles, and original contributions of major significance. The case was remanded for a final merits review to assess the Petitioner’s sustained acclaim and top standing in his field.
Next Steps:
The Director should conduct a final merits review considering the totality of evidence to determine if the Petitioner’s achievements justify the extraordinary ability classification.
