Date of Decision: JUNE 6, 2019
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: President of a Manufacturing Company
Field: Manufacturing, Aerospace Components
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
[Leading or Critical Role]:
The petitioner served in a leading and critical role as the founder and president of his manufacturing company, which supplies components to the aerospace industry.
Criteria Not Met:
[Original Contributions of Major Significance]:
The petitioner claimed original contributions through technological advancements and business growth, but the evidence did not demonstrate that these contributions had a major impact on the field as a whole.
[High Salary or Remuneration]:
The petitioner provided evidence of his income, but it did not establish that his salary was high in relation to others in the field during the relevant time period.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner did not claim any awards or prizes.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
No published materials were provided or discussed in the appeal.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner claimed advancements in manufacturing technology and business growth. However, the evidence did not support that these contributions had a major significance in the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner did not claim participation as a judge.
Membership in Associations:
No memberships in associations were discussed.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
No authorship of scholarly articles was claimed.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner was recognized for his leading role in his manufacturing company, which has partnerships with well-established companies in the aerospace industry.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The petitioner did not claim participation in artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner provided evidence of his salary, but it was not demonstrated to be high in comparison to others in the field during the relevant time period.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
The petitioner did not claim any commercial successes in the performing arts.
Supporting Documentation
- Letters from Business Partners:
Letters were provided from various business partners, attesting to the petitioner’s contributions and the reputation of his company. - Photographs and Certification Scores:
Photographs of the manufacturing facility and certification scores were included, but they did not demonstrate the petitioner’s original contributions or their significance in the field. - Income Evidence:
Tax documents and salary statements were provided but did not establish a high salary in comparison to others in the field.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a qualifying one-time achievement or documents that meet at least three of the ten criteria listed in 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). Additionally, the totality of the evidence did not support a finding of sustained national or international acclaim and recognition required for the classification sought.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider submitting additional evidence or documentation to support the claims if seeking future appeals or reapplications.
