Date of Decision: November 23, 2016
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: President of a Manufacturing Company
Field: Engineering Management
Nationality: Venezuela
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Published Material: The Petitioner provided an article from a professional publication discussing his award and role in his company.
- High Salary: Initially determined by the Director to be met based on the Petitioner’s projected salary; however, later withdrawn upon review.
Criteria Not Met:
- Awards: The Petitioner claimed recognition by a magazine, but it was not established as a nationally or internationally recognized award for excellence.
- Membership in Associations: The Petitioner was a member of an association, but it did not require outstanding achievements judged by national or international experts.
- Original Contributions: The Petitioner’s involvement in developing anti-smuggling legislation was recognized, but not sufficient to meet the criteria.
- Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner held a leadership position in his company and at a university, but it was not sufficiently demonstrated that these organizations had distinguished reputations.
- Evidence of High Salary: The Petitioner did not show his salary was high in relation to others in his field as a president or chief executive officer.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner presented his selection as one of the top successful managers by a local magazine, but it did not qualify as a recognized award for excellence in his field.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
An article about the Petitioner in a professional publication met the criterion of published material.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner’s development of anti-smuggling legislation was noted, but it did not meet the regulatory criterion for original contributions of major significance.
Participation as a Judge:
Not applicable.
Membership in Associations:
The Petitioner was a member of an association; however, it did not require outstanding achievements judged by experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The Petitioner’s roles in his company and at a university were not sufficiently demonstrated as leading or critical within distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The Petitioner’s salary was initially found to meet the criterion, but upon further review, it was determined that he did not command a high salary in relation to others in his field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Letters from Associations: Provided background on the association but did not prove outstanding achievements or evaluation by experts.
- Articles and Publications: Included articles about the Petitioner’s awards and roles.
- Salary Documentation: Included projections and comparisons which were ultimately found insufficient.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed as the Petitioner did not meet the necessary criteria to demonstrate extraordinary ability.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner failed to provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the required criteria, and the totality of the evidence did not establish his sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the top individuals in his field.
Next Steps:
Petitioners should ensure they can provide evidence meeting at least three criteria and demonstrate their sustained national or international acclaim. Consulting with an experienced immigration attorney can be beneficial for preparing a strong petition.
