Date of Decision: March 23, 2015
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Psychologist
Field: Dream Interpretation Psychology
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Published Material About the Petitioner:
The petitioner provided evidence of her appearance on a television show as a dream analyst, broadcast on a major media channel, which constitutes “major media.”
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not provide evidence that her membership in associations required outstanding achievements of their members, as judged by recognized national or international experts.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner did not demonstrate the impact of her book in the field or show that her public engagements had a significant impact on the field of psychology.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner did not show that her articles constituted scholarly articles published in professional or major trade publications or other major media.
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that she performed in a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation.
Key Points from the Decision
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The petitioner appeared on a television show as a dream analyst, which was broadcast on a major media channel. This was the only criterion the petitioner met according to the AAO’s review.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner claimed her book provided significant contributions to the field, but did not provide evidence of its impact or reception within the field. The petitioner also did not demonstrate the impact of her public engagements or her app development.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner claimed membership in professional associations but did not provide evidence that these associations required outstanding achievements for membership.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner’s articles lacked citations, peer review, and the depth typically associated with scholarly articles.
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that she held a leading or critical role in the organizations mentioned, nor did she provide evidence of the distinguished reputation of these organizations.
Supporting Documentation
- Television show appearance evidence
- Book signing event evidence
- Undated letters from professional colleagues
- Online printouts regarding the petitioner’s app
- Reference letters from colleagues and clients
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not meet the initial evidence requirements set forth by the USCIS, failing to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and that she is one of the small percentage who have risen to the very top of her field.
Next Steps: The petitioner may file a motion to reconsider or reopen the case by submitting Form I-290B within 33 days of the decision date.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
