Date of Decision: March 2, 2015
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Researcher
Field: Sciences
Nationality: [Nationality not specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner has submitted sufficient evidence, including his position as a reviewer for scholarly journals, to establish that he meets this criterion.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner has submitted multiple published works in professional or major trade publications, establishing that he meets this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner provided several letters from experts in the field. However, the petitioner did not demonstrate how his findings have had a significant impact within his field. Assertions from letters were considered insufficient without demonstrable impact or corroborative evidence.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
No applicable information was provided regarding awards or prizes.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
While the petitioner’s works were noted, the documentation failed to establish that these materials led to sustained national or international acclaim or significant impact.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner provided letters and examples of research findings. However, the letters lacked specific evidence on how these contributions significantly impacted the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner met the requirements by demonstrating his role as a reviewer for scholarly journals.
Membership in Associations:
No applicable information was provided regarding membership in associations.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner met the criteria by submitting sufficient evidence of his published works.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
No applicable information was provided regarding leading or critical roles performed.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
No applicable information was provided regarding artistic exhibitions or showcases.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
No applicable information was provided regarding high salary or remuneration.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
No applicable information was provided regarding commercial successes in the performing arts.
Supporting Documentation
- Expert Letters: Provided insights but lacked evidence of significant impact.
- Published Works: Demonstrated authorship but not significant impact.
- Journal Reviewer Role: Established criterion met for judging.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not meet the burden of proof to establish eligibility for the immigration benefit sought. The evidence provided was insufficient to demonstrate extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may file a motion to reconsider or a motion to reopen within 33 days of the decision date.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
