Date of Decision: MAY 22, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Research Scientist
Field: Radio-optical Astroinformatics
Nationality: Netherlands
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner has served as a manuscript reviewer for notable journals in his field.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: Authored several peer-reviewed articles published in recognized scientific journals.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance: Despite numerous articles and citations, the evidence did not conclusively show that his contributions have been of major significance in his field.
Leading or Critical Role Performed: The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that his roles in various projects were leading or critical to the organizations involved.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won: Not applicable.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: The Petitioner’s work is recognized in academic circles, with several citations across his publications, but not to an extent reflecting major significance.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: His contributions are acknowledged but are not deemed significant enough to influence the field broadly or profoundly.
Participation as a Judge: Recognized for his contributions to peer reviews in the field.
Membership in Associations: Not specified in the decision.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: Listed several articles that contribute to the field but lack significant influence as required.
Leading or Critical Role Performed: Involved in significant projects, but his roles were not considered critical to the core success of these initiatives.
Supporting Documentation
- Detailed resume including academic and professional history.
- Publications and peer-reviewed articles.
- Reference letters from academic and professional associates.
- Documentation of participation in significant projects and reviews.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The Petitioner has not demonstrated eligibility for the classification as per the required evidentiary criteria. The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The evidence provided, while substantial, does not meet the high standards set for this visa category, particularly in proving major significant contributions or critical roles in prominent organizations.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence or explore alternative visa classifications.
