Date of Decision: March 19, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Radiologist
Field: Radiology
Nationality: [Not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The beneficiary has authored several scholarly articles. However, it was noted that only one of these articles directly relates to the field of radiology.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations that Require Outstanding Achievements:
The petitioner claimed the beneficiary’s membership in several associations but failed to demonstrate that these memberships were based on outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The contributions cited were mainly in genetic research, not directly related to the field of radiology. Therefore, they did not meet the criteria for contributions of major significance in the claimed field.
Key Points from the Decision
Membership in Associations:
The beneficiary was a member of several associations, such as the Association of University Radiologists (AUR), the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA), and the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR). However, these memberships were not shown to be based on outstanding achievements as required.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The cited contributions were primarily in the field of genetic research rather than radiology. The petitioner did not establish how these contributions were significant in the field of radiology or how they would continue to work in this area.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The beneficiary authored several scholarly articles. The director acknowledged this criterion as being met, but it was noted that only one article was relevant to the field of radiology.
Supporting Documentation
Documentation of membership in associations: Provided but insufficient to prove outstanding achievements.
Authorship of scholarly articles: Met the criterion, but limited relevance to the current field of radiology.
Evidence of original contributions: Cited contributions were not directly related to radiology.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Appeal Dismissed
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the required criteria for extraordinary ability. The contributions cited were not directly relevant to the field of radiology, and the memberships did not demonstrate outstanding achievements judged by experts.
Next Steps:
It is recommended that the petitioner review the evidentiary requirements for EB1 classification and gather more relevant documentation or consider alternative immigration pathways if the beneficiary’s qualifications do not meet the stringent criteria of extraordinary ability in their field.
This structured summary highlights the key aspects of the USCIS appeal review decision, providing a clear overview of the petitioner’s background, the criteria analysis, and the final determination.
