Date of Decision: MAY 8, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Professor and Researcher
Field: Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility
Nationality: Turkey
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: Judging of the work of others in the same or allied academic field: Met. The petitioner served as an editor and peer reviewer for professional journals.
Criterion 2: Scholarly articles in the field: Met. The petitioner authored scholarly articles that were published in professional journals.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence: Not met. The evidence provided did not establish that the awards received were recognized nationally or internationally as signs of excellence.
Criterion 2: Published material about the petitioner in professional or major trade publications or major media: Not met. The materials provided were about medical issues, not specifically about the petitioner or his work.
Criterion 3: Original contributions of major significance in the field: Not met. Although the petitioner’s work was cited, he did not demonstrate that these contributions were of major significance to the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner cited awards from Turkey, such as the “Turkish Nobel Prize” reference, but failed to show international or national recognition of these awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Articles and interviews predominantly discussed medical issues rather than the petitioner’s contributions, failing to meet the necessary criteria for this category.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s articles received significant citations, but he failed to demonstrate how these reflected major significance within his field.
Supporting Documentation
- Letters of recommendation from academic peers.
- Evidence of awards and recognition in Turkey.
- Citations and impact factors for published research articles.
- Screenshots from professional journals and media outlets discussing the petitioner’s work.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed as the petitioner failed to meet the required number of evidentiary criteria to establish eligibility for the EB-1 classification. Despite presenting multiple forms of evidence, the petitioner did not convincingly demonstrate that he belongs to the small percentage at the top of his field globally.
Reasoning:
The USCIS concluded that the evidence did not sufficiently show sustained national or international acclaim, nor did it demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field of reproductive endocrinology and infertility.
Next Steps:
It is recommended that the petitioner gather more robust evidence that aligns with the regulatory criteria, especially focusing on demonstrating the major significance and broader acclaim of his work.
