Date of Decision: May 22, 2019
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Scientific Researcher
Field: Sciences
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging: The Petitioner served as a peer reviewer of manuscripts for journals.
Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner authored two scholarly articles in professional publications.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner did not demonstrate that his research articles, though published in prestigious journals like Nature and Science, had a major impact on the field. The citations and recommendation letters provided did not sufficiently establish the significance of his contributions.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- Not applicable.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- The media reports and articles about the Petitioner’s research did not demonstrate widespread impact or significance in the field.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- The Petitioner’s articles received citations but did not establish that they were of major significance in the field.
- Recommendation letters praised the Petitioner’s work but did not provide specific details on how the work was viewed as highly influential by the field.
Participation as a Judge:
- The Petitioner served as a peer reviewer, which fulfilled one of the required criteria.
Membership in Associations:
- Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- The Petitioner authored two scholarly articles, meeting one of the criteria.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
- Not applicable.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
- Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
- Not applicable.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
- Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
- Emails and letters indicating the Petitioner’s role as a peer reviewer.
- Copies of the Petitioner’s scholarly articles.
- Citation records for the Petitioner’s articles.
- Recommendation letters from colleagues and experts in the field.
- Media reports and articles discussing the Petitioner’s research findings.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not meet at least three of the ten required criteria for EB-1 Extraordinary Ability classification. The evidence provided did not establish the major significance of his contributions or sustained national or international acclaim.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of his contributions’ impact and reapplying or exploring other immigration classifications.
