Date of Decision: November 27, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Professor
Field: English Language Education
Nationality: [Not Specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging the Work of Others: The Petitioner satisfied this criterion by providing evidence of judging the work of others in her field, specifically in academic settings.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner met this criterion by authoring scholarly articles relevant to her field of expertise.
Criteria Not Met:
Leading or Critical Role: The evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the Petitioner performed in a leading or critical role within her organization, as her contributions were not shown to significantly impact the overall reputation or success of the institution.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner received the 2022 Award of Excellence in Teaching from her institution. However, this was not deemed sufficient to establish a leading or critical role.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The decision did not specifically address any published materials about the Petitioner, indicating that this criterion was not claimed or evidenced.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The evidence did not support that the Petitioner’s contributions were of major significance to the field as required by the regulations.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner successfully demonstrated her participation as a judge of others’ work in the field, which was acknowledged as meeting one of the criteria.
Membership in Associations:
There was no specific mention or evidence provided for membership in associations, suggesting this criterion was not claimed.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner provided sufficient evidence of her authorship of scholarly articles, meeting this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
Despite submitting additional letters and documentation, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that her role as Coordinator of the English Language Pathways program was critical to the overall success or reputation of her institution.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
This criterion was not relevant or claimed in the Petitioner’s case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
There was no evidence provided to support this criterion.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
This criterion was not applicable to the Petitioner’s case.
Supporting Documentation
- Letters from Colleagues and Supervisors:
- Multiple letters were provided, including those from the Director of English for Academic Purposes and the President of the institution, asserting the Petitioner’s role and contributions.
- The letters emphasized her impact on the curriculum and student enrollment but lacked specific examples linking her work to the broader success of the institution.
- Enrollment and Funding Reports:
- Documentation of increased enrollment and grant funding was submitted, but the timing of these reports did not align with the period relevant to the petition.
- Teaching Awards:
- Evidence of teaching awards, such as the 2022 Award of Excellence, was provided but deemed insufficient to establish extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reopen and reconsider was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not provide new evidence that would alter the initial decision nor establish that the prior decision was incorrect based on the evidence or application of law and policy.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider providing more detailed evidence of her critical role and contributions or pursuing other immigration pathways suited to her qualifications.
