Date of Decision: March 14, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Operational Safety Specialist
Field: Operational Safety
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Participation as a Judge: The petitioner demonstrated involvement in judging the work of others in the field of operational safety.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner submitted scholarly articles that were published in reputable journals.
- Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner held a leading or critical role in distinguished organizations.
Criteria Not Met:
- Awards and Prizes: The petitioner did not demonstrate that his academic awards and scholarships are recognized as major, nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence.
- Memberships in associations: The petitioner did not show that his memberships in professional associations reflect sustained national or international acclaim.
- Published Materials About the Petitioner: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of published material about him in major trade publications or other major media.
- Original Contributions: The petitioner did not adequately demonstrate that his contributions are of major significance in the field.
- Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: There was no evidence provided to show that the petitioner commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner’s academic awards and scholarships were not considered indicative of extraordinary ability, as they were primarily student-level awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of major trade or mainstream media publications discussing his work.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
While the petitioner made original contributions, he did not demonstrate their major significance in the field of operational safety.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner provided some evidence of his participation in judging the work of others, but this was not deemed sufficient to establish extraordinary ability.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner’s memberships in professional organizations did not reflect sustained national or international acclaim.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner authored scholarly articles, but their impact and recognition in the field were not sufficiently demonstrated.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner held a leading role in his current employment, but this was not enough to establish sustained acclaim or that he is among the very top of the field.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
There was no evidence provided to show that the petitioner commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Exhibit A: Evidence of judging activities, including invitations to review manuscripts.
- Exhibit B: Copies of scholarly articles authored by the petitioner.
- Exhibit C: Evidence of leading or critical roles held in organizations.
- Exhibit D: Documentation related to awards and prizes received.
- Exhibit E: Membership certificates in professional associations.
- Exhibit F: Screenshots and download statistics of scholarly articles.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reconsider and the motion to reopen were both denied.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field. The evidence provided did not meet the high standard required for the EB-1 classification.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of extraordinary ability, such as internationally recognized awards, high remuneration, or additional significant contributions to the field, before reapplying.
