Date of Decision: September 24, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Postdoctoral Researcher
Field: Molecular Biology
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participated as a Judge in the Work of others: The Petitioner reviewed papers for journals, fulfilling the judging criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv).
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner authored scholarly articles in professional publications, meeting the criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi).
Criteria Not Met:
Original Scientific Contributions: The Petitioner provided evidence of original scientific contributions, including media reports about his research and expert testimonies. However, these did not demonstrate that the contributions were of major significance in the field. The Petitioner cited publications in high-impact journals and citation metrics, but the documentation did not establish that these contributions had a widespread influence or were widely implemented throughout the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
No evidence provided.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner referenced two articles on sciencenet.cn and ebiotrade.com about his research published in Nature Neuroscience. However, these articles did not demonstrate widespread media coverage or major significance.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner argued for the significance of his research through citation counts and expert testimonials. However, the USCIS found that these did not sufficiently prove the major significance of his contributions.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner reviewed papers for journals, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
No evidence provided.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner authored several scholarly articles, which met the criterion but did not demonstrate major significance.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
No evidence provided.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
No evidence provided.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The Petitioner provided various supporting documents, including citation metrics, expert testimonies, and media reports. However, these did not collectively establish that the Petitioner’s contributions were of major significance in the field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not meet the required evidentiary criteria to establish extraordinary ability. The evidence provided did not demonstrate major significance or widespread impact in the field of molecular biology.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider submitting additional evidence that clearly establishes the major significance of their contributions or explore other immigration options that may better fit their qualifications.
