Date of Decision: December 11, 2017
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Physician
Field: Sciences
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging the Work of Others: The petitioner reviewed manuscripts and articles for professional publications, satisfying this criterion.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner authored scholarly articles that were published in professional journals, meeting this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations: The petitioner did not demonstrate that his “Degree of Fellow” from the American Academy of Family Physicians required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. Similarly, his certification by the American Board of Family Medicine did not meet the required standards.
Published Material About the Petitioner: The petitioner provided articles from websites that were not established as major media. The self-promotional nature of the publisher’s assertions was not deemed reliable evidence.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: While the petitioner’s research on the amino acid homocysteine was cited in various articles, the evidence did not show that his work was considered to hold major significance in the field. The recommendation letters provided did not demonstrate how his research had a significant impact.
Leading or Critical Role: The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that his role as a physician at the specified clinic was critical to its success or that the clinic had a distinguished reputation. The provided letters, while supportive, did not show how his contributions were critical to the clinic’s operations or reputation.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable in this case.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner provided articles related to his research, but they were not from major media or professional publications. The provided evidence did not meet the required standards.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s research on homocysteine was cited by other scholars, but the citations alone did not establish that his contributions were of major significance. The recommendation letters were supportive but lacked specific examples of significant impact.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner reviewed manuscripts and articles for professional publications, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner’s fellowship and certification were not shown to require outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner authored scholarly articles published in professional journals, meeting this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner did not demonstrate a critical role in organizations with distinguished reputations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable in this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable in this case.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
- Certificates and Awards: Documentation of fellowships and certifications.
- Articles and Publications: Articles related to the petitioner’s research.
- Letters of Support: Letters from peers and colleagues in the medical field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the required criteria for EB-1 classification. Despite notable achievements, the petitioner did not establish the level of extraordinary ability required.
Next Steps: The petitioner should consider reapplying with additional evidence or exploring other visa categories that may better suit his qualifications and achievements.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
