Date of Decision: November 27, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Professor and Researcher
Field: Law
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner authored scholarly articles in professional journals, including papers published in “People’s Tribune,” “Political Science and Law,” and “Journal of Juvenile Crimes and Delinquency,” satisfying the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi).
Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner evaluated a master’s degree thesis as part of her duties as an associate professor and participated in a provincial legal essay competition, meeting the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv).
Criteria Not Met:
Published Material: The Petitioner provided articles and interviews in professional or major media, but the materials were not primarily about her or published in qualifying types of media, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iii).
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that her contributions were of major significance in the field. The documentation provided included general praise and proposed legislative amendments that had not been implemented at the time of filing, failing to meet the criterion under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v).
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner did not provide evidence of receiving nationally or internationally recognized awards.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The articles and interviews submitted were not primarily about the Petitioner or published in qualifying major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner’s contributions, including proposed legislative amendments, were not demonstrated to have a significant impact on the field of law.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner participated as a judge in academic settings, meeting this criterion.
Membership in Associations:
Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner authored several scholarly articles, meeting this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Not applicable.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The Petitioner provided various supporting documents, including letters of recommendation, articles, and evidence of judging activities. However, these did not collectively establish the required criteria for extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not demonstrate that she met at least three of the ten initial evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. While the Petitioner satisfied the criteria for authorship of scholarly articles and participation as a judge, the totality of the evidence did not establish her sustained national or international acclaim or her standing at the very top of her field. The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of nationally or internationally recognized awards, major media publications, or original contributions of major significance.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider submitting additional evidence that clearly establishes the major significance of her contributions or explore other immigration options that may better fit her qualifications.
