Date of Decision: JUL. 29, 2022
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Senior Research Fellow
Field: Neurotoxicology
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner has peer-reviewed manuscripts for several journals, including Toxicological Sciences, Neurotoxicology, Prion, Journal of Cellular Physiology, and The American Journal of Pathology. This evidence satisfies the criterion.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner has authored scholarly articles published in journals such as Movement Disorders, Neuropharmacology, The American Journal of Pathology, Prion, and The Journal of Biological Chemistry, meeting the criterion.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner has demonstrated original scientific contributions of major significance in his field, particularly through his published research, citation record, and detailed letters from experts. His work on disease detection has been recognized for its significant impact and influence on the field, meeting the criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
None explicitly mentioned as not met.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner’s work has been highlighted in scientific and mainstream media, including ScienceDaily, MedScape, Yahoo, and MSN, emphasizing the significance of his research findings.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Detailed letters from experts and evidence of government-provided research funding underscore the major impact of the Petitioner’s research on early diagnostic methods for neurological disorders and prion diseases.
Participation as a Judge:
Confirmed peer-review roles in several reputable journals.
Membership in Associations:
Not explicitly detailed in the provided document.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner’s articles are published in high-impact journals, reflecting his significant contributions to the field.
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
- Peer Review Evidence: Letters and confirmations of the Petitioner’s role in peer reviewing for multiple scientific journals.
- Published Articles: Copies and citations of the Petitioner’s articles in high-impact journals.
- Expert Letters: Detailed letters from leading experts in the field, highlighting the significance of the Petitioner’s contributions.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The case was remanded for further consideration and a new decision by the Director, with specific instructions to conduct a final merits determination assessing the Petitioner’s sustained national or international acclaim.
Reasoning:
The Director’s initial denial was withdrawn as it did not fully consider the evidence of the Petitioner’s original contributions of major significance. The totality of the evidence must be analyzed to determine if the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the top of his field.
Next Steps:
The Director is instructed to review the entire record and make a new determination on the Petitioner’s eligibility for the requested classification as an individual of extraordinary ability.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
Cite as Matter of G-M-, ID# 19880517
JUL292022_01B2203
