EB-1 Extraordinary Ability USCIS Appeal Review – Physician from Brazil – APR252023_01B2203

Date of Decision: April 25, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability

Petitioner Information

• Profession: Physician
• Field: Gastroenterology
• Nationality: Brazilian

Summary of Decision

• Initial Decision: Denied
• Appeal Outcome: Denied

Evidentiary Criteria Analysis

Criteria Met:

1. Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner participated as a judge of the work of others in the same or allied field.
2. Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner authored scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media.

Criteria Not Met:

1. Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards: The Petitioner did not establish that any of the awards qualify as nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field.
2. Original contributions of major significance: The evidence provided did not establish that the Petitioner’s work has significantly impacted the field as a whole.
3. Display of work at artistic exhibitions or showcases: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that his work was displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases, and comparable evidence was not sufficient.
4. Leading or critical role for organizations with distinguished reputation: The Petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that he performed a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation.
5. High salary or other significantly high remuneration: The evidence did not demonstrate that the Petitioner commanded a high salary in relation to others in his field.

Key Points from the Decision

Awards and Prizes Won:

• The Petitioner’s awards were not sufficiently demonstrated to be nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in the field of gastroenterology.

Published Materials About the Petitioner:

• Withdrawn by the Petitioner on appeal.

Original Contributions of Major Significance:

• The Petitioner’s published work, funded research, and peer-reviewed articles did not sufficiently demonstrate major significance in the field.

Participation as a Judge:

• The Petitioner participated as a judge of the work of others in the same or allied field.

Membership in Associations:

• Withdrawn by the Petitioner on appeal.

Authorship of Scholarly Articles:

• The Petitioner authored scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media.

Leading or Critical Role Performed:

• The Petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that he performed a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation.

Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:

• The Petitioner did not demonstrate that his work was displayed at artistic exhibitions or showcases, and comparable evidence was not sufficient.

Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:

• The Petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate a high salary or other significantly high remuneration in relation to others in his field.

Supporting Documentation

• Printout of magazine article: Documenting the Petitioner’s recognition on the 2008 Saude Analise’s list.
• Articles authored by the Petitioner: Submitted as evidence of original contributions.
• Citation record: Indicating the Petitioner’s work was cited 50 times.
• Letters from employers and colleagues: Attesting to the Petitioner’s roles and contributions.
• Brazilian personal income tax returns: Submitted as evidence of high salary, but not fully translated and certified.

Conclusion

Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.

Reasoning:

• The Petitioner did not submit the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or documents that meet at least three of the ten lesser criteria.
• The totality of the material provided does not show sustained national or international acclaim, nor does it demonstrate that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor.

Next Steps:

• Consider gathering more robust and detailed evidence to meet the evidentiary criteria.
• Ensure all documentation is fully translated and certified as required.
• Review and possibly strengthen the evidence for each criterion to better demonstrate extraordinary ability.

Download the Full Petition Review Here.