Date of Decision: September 18, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Postdoctoral Researcher
Field: Viral Immunology
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge of the Work of Others:
The Petitioner reviewed manuscripts for professional journals, which constitutes judging the work of others in her field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner has published articles in several esteemed journals, including the Journal of Virology, Carcinogenesis, Oncogene, Vaccine, and Nature Cell Biology.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Although the Petitioner made contributions to liver cancer research and West Nile Virus (WNV) research, the record does not demonstrate that these contributions have significantly impacted the field. The letters provided in support lack specific details of how her research has influenced the field, and citation records alone are insufficient to establish major significance.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not specifically addressed in the decision, indicating no significant awards or prizes were presented as evidence.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Not addressed in the decision, suggesting no such evidence was presented.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner made contributions related to liver cancer and WNV research. However, the provided letters failed to demonstrate how these contributions have had a significant impact on the field. While the Petitioner’s research is acknowledged, the lack of specific evidence of its influence and significance means this criterion was not met.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner reviewed manuscripts for professional journals, demonstrating her role in judging the work of others in her field.
Membership in Associations:
Not addressed in the decision, suggesting no such evidence was presented.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner has a strong publication record in notable journals, which meets this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Not addressed in the decision, suggesting no such evidence was presented.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable based on the field of viral immunology.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not addressed in the decision, suggesting no such evidence was presented.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable based on the field of viral immunology.
Supporting Documentation
The provided documentation includes letters from professionals highlighting the Petitioner’s contributions to liver cancer and WNV research. These letters describe the significance of her work but lack detailed evidence of its major impact. The record also includes evidence of her publications in several renowned journals and her participation in reviewing manuscripts.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal dismissed.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not submit the required initial evidence of either a qualifying one-time achievement or documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria listed in the regulations. The overall review of the submitted materials did not demonstrate the sustained acclaim and recognition required for the classification sought.
Next Steps:
The Petitioner may consider gathering more robust and detailed evidence to support the criteria that were not met. Ensuring that all documentation, especially letters of support, contain specific details about the significance and impact of her contributions on the field is crucial for any future submissions.
