EB-1 Extraordinary Ability USCIS Appeal Review – Project Commercial Manager – JAN292021_02B2203

Date of Decision: January 29, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability

Petitioner Information

Profession: Project Commercial Manager
Field: Rail Transportation Systems
Nationality: Not specified in the document

Summary of Decision

Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied

Evidentiary Criteria Analysis

Criteria Met:

1. None Met: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet any of the required criteria.

Criteria Not Met:

1. Membership in Associations: The petitioner claimed the beneficiary was a member of associations that require outstanding achievements, but this was not substantiated with sufficient evidence.
2. Participation as a Judge: Although the beneficiary participated in reviewing work for the Finance and Transport ministries, it was not clearly demonstrated whose work was judged and how this constituted judging the work of others.
3. Original Contributions: The petitioner claimed that the beneficiary made original contributions of major significance. However, there was not enough evidence to support this claim effectively.
4. Critical Role: The petitioner suggested that the beneficiary served in a critical role for various projects, but this was not adequately documented in the evidence provided.

Key Points from the Decision

Awards and Prizes Won:

• No evidence of any major, internationally recognized awards was provided.

Published Materials About the Petitioner:

• No specific publications about the petitioner were provided as evidence.

Original Contributions of Major Significance:

• The claims of original contributions were not supported with sufficient and specific evidence to meet the criterion.

Participation as a Judge:

• The role of the beneficiary in judging work was described but lacked the necessary documentation and specificity to establish it as evidence of extraordinary ability.

Membership in Associations:

• The membership in professional associations was claimed but not substantiated with evidence demonstrating the criteria for outstanding achievements.

Authorship of Scholarly Articles:

• No scholarly articles authored by the beneficiary were presented as evidence.

Leading or Critical Role Performed:

• The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the beneficiary performed a leading or critical role in significant projects.

Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:

• Not applicable to this case.

Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:

• No evidence of high salary or remuneration compared to others in the field was provided.

Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:

• Not applicable to this case.

Supporting Documentation

• The petition lacked initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or documentation meeting at least three of the ten alternate criteria required for EB1 classification.
• Testimonial letters describing the beneficiary’s role and contributions were deemed insufficient as they lacked specificity and detailed documentation.

Conclusion

Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed, and the denial of the petition was upheld.
Reasoning:

• The petitioner did not demonstrate that the beneficiary met the necessary criteria for extraordinary ability classification.
• The evidence provided did not establish that the beneficiary had garnered national or international acclaim or that he was among the small percentage at the top of his field.

Next Steps:

• The petitioner may consider gathering more robust and specific evidence of the beneficiary’s achievements and contributions in the field.
• They might also consider consulting with an immigration attorney specializing in EB1 petitions to better understand and meet the evidentiary requirements.

Download the Full Petition Review Here