USCIS Appeal Review: Extraordinary Ability Visa Case
Date of Decision: June 30, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Producer of telecommunications hardware and software
Field: Telecommunications
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Contributions of Major Significance: Met. The beneficiary’s contributions in developing novel telecommunications software and hardware were recognized.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: Met. The beneficiary has published scholarly articles that contribute to the field.
Performance in a Leading or Critical Role: Met. The beneficiary held a leading role in a company known for its reputable innovations in telecommunications.
High Salary Relative to Others in the Field: Met. The beneficiary’s remuneration was significantly higher than average in the field.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance: Not sufficiently demonstrated. Although the beneficiary developed innovative technologies, the appeal failed to establish these as influential or recognized as major contributions within the industry standards.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
No major internationally recognized awards were cited.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Several articles and press releases discuss the technology and companies associated with the beneficiary, though they do not focus specifically on the individual’s accomplishments.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The beneficiary’s contributions to telecommunications through patents and software development are noted, but these were not deemed sufficient to prove extraordinary ability as defined by USCIS standards.
Participation as a Judge, Membership in Associations, and Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not specifically discussed as separate points within the decision document.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The beneficiary’s role as a leader in significant projects and his influence in a company that was eventually acquired are recognized but were not enough to sway the final decision.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases, Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration, and Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
The high remuneration was acknowledged; however, it did not convincingly demonstrate that the beneficiary stands out at the top of his field.
Supporting Documentation
Patents, scholarly articles, reference letters, and employment contracts were submitted. However, these documents were deemed insufficient to prove sustained national or international acclaim.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The beneficiary’s case was re-evaluated on appeal, but it was concluded that although they meet several evidentiary criteria, the overall impact and recognition in the field are not at the level required for the EB1 extraordinary ability category.
Reasoning:
The appeal focused heavily on patents and commercial ventures related to the beneficiary’s work. However, the broader influence and recognition necessary to fulfill USCIS criteria for extraordinary ability were not adequately demonstrated.
Next Steps:
It is recommended that the petitioner consider gathering more targeted evidence that directly relates to the beneficiary’s impact and recognition in the field or explore other visa categories that might be more applicable to the beneficiary’s current career stage and accomplishments.
