EB-1 Extraordinary Ability USCIS Appeal Review – Professor of Engineering from Egypt – FEB032023_04B2203

Date of Decision: February 3, 2023
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability

Petitioner Information

• Profession: Professor of Engineering
• Field: Mechanical, Aeronautical, and Aerospace Engineering
• Nationality: Egyptian

Summary of Decision

• Initial Decision: Denied
• Appeal Outcome: Remanded

Evidentiary Criteria Analysis

Criteria Met:

1. Authorship of Scholarly Articles:

• The Petitioner authored several research papers published in mechanical, aeronautical, and aerospace engineering scholarly journals.

1. Participation as a Judge:

• The Petitioner judged doctoral dissertations and performed peer reviews for colleagues.

Criteria Not Met:

1. Membership in Associations:

• The Petitioner did not establish membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.

2. Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:

• The Petitioner’s participation in college open houses and inclusion of research papers at industry conferences did not qualify as artistic exhibitions or showcases.

3. Original Contributions of Major Significance:

• The Petitioner’s contributions, including published scientific research papers and breakthroughs in aerospace guidance and control, were not deemed sufficient.

4. High Salary or Remuneration:

• The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate a high salary in relation to others in the field.

5. Lesser National or International Awards:

• The Petitioner’s military duty medal from the President of Egypt was not sufficiently analyzed by the Director.

6. Leading or Critical Role:

• The Petitioner’s roles at the Egyptian strategic defense center and the formation of curriculum at the School of Aviation and Flight Technology in Canada were not adequately considered.

Key Points from the Decision

Awards and Prizes Won:

• Military Duty Medal:
• Received from the President of Egypt in 2002 for 26 years of service in mechanical, aeronautical, and aerospace engineering roles.

Published Materials About the Petitioner:

• Scholarly Journals:
• Multiple research papers published in respected engineering journals.

Original Contributions of Major Significance:

• Research Contributions:
• 28 published scientific research papers and asserted breakthroughs in aerospace guidance and control.

Participation as a Judge:

• Doctoral Dissertations and Peer Reviews:
• Judged doctoral dissertations and conducted peer reviews.

Membership in Associations:

• Professional Memberships:
• Member of several associations, including the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.

Authorship of Scholarly Articles:

• Engineering Journals:
• Published several research papers in scholarly journals.

Leading or Critical Role:

• Leadership Roles:
• Held leadership positions at the Egyptian strategic defense center and contributed to curriculum development in Canada.

Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:

• Industry Conferences:
• Presented research papers at industry conferences, though not classified as artistic showcases.

Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:

• Professor Salary:
• Salary as a professor at a Canadian college not deemed significantly high relative to the field.

Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:

• Not Applicable:
• No relevant evidence provided.

Supporting Documentation

1. Military Duty Medal:

• Documentation of the award received from the President of Egypt.

1. Professional Memberships:

• Evidence of membership in various professional associations.

1. Research Publications:

• Copies of published research papers and evidence of peer reviews conducted.

1. Leadership Roles:

• Documentation of leadership positions held and contributions to curriculum development.

1. Salary Records:

• Employment records indicating salary as a professor.

Conclusion

Final Determination: The decision was withdrawn, and the case was remanded for further analysis.
Reasoning:

• The Director did not sufficiently analyze all the evidence provided, particularly regarding the military duty medal and the Petitioner’s leadership roles.
  Next Steps:
• The Director will issue a new decision evaluating the additional evidence and determining if the Petitioner meets the required criteria. The Petitioner should ensure all relevant evidence is clearly documented and submitted for reconsideration.

Download the full petition article here