Date of Decision: FEB. 24, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Orthopaedic Scholar
Field: Sports Medicine and Orthopaedic Surgery
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met
Lesser Prizes or Awards: The Petitioner received scholarships from the Government of the Republic of I and “The National Merit Order” for “the best young researcher of II cycles of studies” in 2018.
Published Material: Four items reflecting published material about the Petitioner from 2014-2017.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: Authored 14 journal articles, with citations showing some reference within the field.
Criteria Not Met
Sustained National or International Acclaim: Despite satisfying the initial criteria, the Petitioner did not demonstrate a level of acclaim consistent with being among the top in the field.
Career of Acclaimed Work: The awards and scholarships were seen as recognition for academic pursuits rather than professional achievements at the top level of the field.
Significance of Judging Experience: The judging experience involved evaluating first-year medical students rather than nationally or internationally renowned professionals.
Media Coverage Consistency: Limited media coverage from 2014-2017 did not demonstrate sustained acclaim necessary for this classification.
Impact of Publications: The Petitioner did not show the significance of his publications or their impact on the field to the extent required.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
The awards and scholarships received were recognized but did not reflect a career of acclaimed work necessary for EB-1 classification. The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that these recognitions placed him at the very top of his field.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
Four items of published material from 2014-2017 were acknowledged, but the lack of consistent media coverage did not support sustained national or international acclaim.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The evidence did not establish that the Petitioner made impactful or influential contributions reflecting a career of acclaimed work.
Participation as a Judge
The judging experience was deemed insufficient as it involved evaluating first-year medical students rather than top professionals in the field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
The Petitioner authored 14 articles, but the evidence did not show that the publications or citations demonstrated the requisite level of sustained national or international acclaim.
Other Criteria
Membership in Associations: Not mentioned.
Leading or Critical Role: Not mentioned.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration: Not mentioned.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
Scholarships: Government of the Republic of I (2016, 2017)
Awards: The National Merit Order (2018)
Publications: Four items from 2014-2017
Letters of Recommendation: Discussed the Petitioner’s work and contributions but lacked evidence of widespread acclaim.
Authorship and Citations: Authored 14 articles with some citations, but not enough to meet the required standard.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed. The evidence provided did not meet the high standard required for EB-1 classification, which is intended for individuals at the very top of their field.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim, nor did he show that his achievements were recognized as being at the very top of his field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider providing more substantial evidence of his professional achievements, media coverage, and the impact of his work to support future applications.
