Date of Decision: February 5, 2024
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Researcher
Field: Veterinary Science
Nationality: Nepali
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner has been recognized for authorship in the field of veterinary science, having published research articles on topics such as avian flu virus detection and the impact of dietary components on poultry health.
- Participation as a Judge: The petitioner has judged research articles by undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral students in the field of veterinary science.
Criteria Not Met:
- Receipt of Lesser Prizes or Awards: The petitioner received several student-focused awards but failed to provide sufficient evidence that these awards are recognized nationally or internationally or that they were awarded for excellence in the veterinary field.
- Membership in Associations Requiring Outstanding Achievement: Evidence was insufficient to demonstrate that membership in the submitted associations requires outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts.
- Published Material About the Petitioner: Materials submitted did not adequately relate to the petitioner’s professional work nor were they from sources considered major media or professional publications.
- Original Contributions of Major Significance: The petitioner’s research contributions, while original, lacked sufficient evidence of major significance within the field as required.
- Performance in a Leading or Critical Role: There was insufficient evidence that the petitioner performed in a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation.
Key Points from the Decision
The appeal decision highlighted that while the petitioner has some recognition in his field, the overall impact and acknowledgment of his work do not meet the high standards required for the EB1 classification. The USCIS panel affirmed the initial denial, citing a failure to meet more than two of the necessary evidentiary criteria for demonstrating extraordinary ability.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed, and the petitioner’s initial denial stands.
Reasoning: The petitioner failed to meet the required number of evidentiary criteria to demonstrate extraordinary ability in veterinary science.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of national or international recognition or consider other visa categories more aligned with his current qualifications.
This decision emphasizes the stringent requirements and rigorous scrutiny involved in adjudicating EB1 extraordinary ability petitions, particularly in fields of specialized scientific research.
