Date of Decision: January 26, 2015
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Neonatologist
Field: Medical Sciences
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The petitioner demonstrated research work in the medical field, supported by several letters from professionals within the field. However, the evidence did not convincingly show that the contributions had a significant impact on the field.
Criteria Not Met:
Published Scholarly Articles
The petitioner failed to provide evidence of manuscripts published or accepted for publication prior to the filing date of the petition, June 25, 2013. The submission included dates postdating the filing, which are not admissible for consideration.
Leading or Critical Role
Letters provided did not sufficiently demonstrate that the petitioner held a leading or critical role within an organization. The roles described did not align with the expectations for a leading role in the field.
Awards and Membership
The petitioner did not provide evidence to meet the awards criterion or the membership criterion. On appeal, these criteria were not addressed, indicating abandonment of claims under these criteria.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
No evidence was submitted to meet this criterion.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
No relevant publications were provided with dates prior to the petition filing date.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner presented letters describing esteem and respect within the medical community but failed to show major contributions with significant impact.
Participation as a Judge:
No evidence was submitted for this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not meet this criterion and did not address it on appeal.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner listed manuscripts for publication or presentation with dates after the petition filing date, which cannot be considered.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The roles described in the letters did not satisfy the criterion for leading or critical roles within an organization.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable to this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable to this case.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable to this case.
Supporting Documentation
Letters of Recommendation:
- Provided by peers and professionals in the medical field, emphasizing clinical abilities but lacking evidence of major impact.
Curriculum Vitae:
- Included details of professional history but did not sufficiently address the criteria for EB-1 Extraordinary Ability classification.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner failed to address specific reasons for the initial denial and did not provide sufficient evidence to meet the required criteria for EB-1 classification.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider filing a motion to reopen or reconsider if new evidence becomes available or if there is a belief of legal or factual error in the decision.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
