Date of Decision: JAN. 12, 2017
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Public Policy
Field: Creativity as it relates to public policy
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Published material about the petitioner: Evidence submitted included publications in professional publications written by others about the petitioner’s work in the academic field.
Original scholarly research contributions: The petitioner claimed original scholarly research contributions in the field of public policy.
Authorship of scholarly articles: The petitioner provided evidence of authorship of scholarly books or articles in scholarly journals with international circulation in the field.
Leading or critical role: The petitioner performed a leading and critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation.
Criteria Not Met:
Evidence of high salary or remuneration: No documentation was provided to demonstrate a high salary or other significant remuneration.
Membership in associations: The petitioner did not submit evidence of membership in associations that require outstanding achievements of their members.
Participation as a judge: No evidence was presented to show the petitioner’s participation as a judge of the work of others in the field.
Awards and prizes: The petitioner did not provide documentation of having received nationally or internationally recognized awards or prizes.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- No significant awards or prizes were documented.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- The petitioner presented material published in professional publications about their work, but it was deemed insufficient to meet the criteria.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- The petitioner’s contributions were acknowledged but did not meet the threshold of “major significance.”
Participation as a Judge:
- The petitioner did not provide any evidence of serving as a judge of the work of others in the field.
Membership in Associations:
- There was no evidence of membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- Evidence of authorship in scholarly journals was provided but was not sufficient to meet the required criteria.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
- While the petitioner claimed to have performed a leading and critical role, the evidence provided was not persuasive enough to satisfy the criteria.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- Not applicable in this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- The petitioner did not submit sufficient evidence of high salary or other significant remuneration.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
- Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
Published Articles:
- Articles published about the petitioner’s work in the field of public policy.
Scholarly Contributions:
- Documentation of original scholarly research contributions.
Authored Works:
- Copies of books or articles authored by the petitioner in international journals.
Professional Role:
- Evidence of the petitioner’s leading and critical role in reputable organizations.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The motion to reconsider is denied.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not establish that the decision was based on an incorrect application of law or USCIS policy. The evidence provided did not meet the required criteria for extraordinary ability.
Next Steps: The petitioner should consider gathering additional evidence that clearly meets the required criteria or seek legal advice to explore other potential immigration options.
