Date of Decision: November 22, 2016
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Software Engineering Director
Field: Software Engineering, particularly scalable web architectures
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging Criterion: The petitioner reviewed nominations and selected winners for a significant award, meeting the criteria for participation as a judge of the work of others in the same field.
Leading or Critical Role Criterion: As Director of Engineering, the petitioner performed in a leading or critical role for an organization with a distinguished reputation.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards: The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to prove receipt of awards recognized at a national or international level in the field of software engineering.
Published Material About the Petitioner: The submitted articles were about the petitioner’s company and its services, not about the petitioner himself.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: The provided reference letters did not establish that the petitioner’s work had a significant impact on the field of software engineering beyond his employer and its clients.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The petitioner submitted a blog post, which was not considered scholarly or published in major trade publications or other major media.
High Salary or Remuneration: The petitioner did not provide supporting evidence such as payroll records or tax forms to substantiate claims of high salary relative to others in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner claimed receipt of a significant company award, but did not provide supporting documentation or evidence that the award is recognized at a national or international level.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Articles provided were about the petitioner’s company and its services, not the petitioner himself.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Reference letters discussed the petitioner’s work but did not demonstrate significant impact on the software engineering field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner provided evidence of reviewing nominations and selecting winners for a significant award.
Membership in Associations:
No specific mention or evidence provided regarding membership in associations.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The petitioner’s blog post was not considered scholarly or published in major trade publications.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner’s role as Director of Engineering was recognized as a leading or critical role for a distinguished organization.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to prove a high salary or significantly high remuneration compared to others in the field.
Supporting Documentation
- Reference Letters: Provided by colleagues and clients, discussing the petitioner’s work but lacking evidence of significant impact on the field.
- Company Awards: Mentioned but not substantiated with supporting documents.
- Articles: About the petitioner’s company, not the petitioner himself.
- Compensation Documents: Included letters discussing salary and stock options but lacking supporting payroll records or tax forms.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed. The petitioner has not demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that he is an individual of extraordinary ability under section 203(b)(1)(A) of the Act.
Reasoning: The petitioner did not satisfy the evidentiary criteria required to establish eligibility for the EB-1 classification. The evidence provided was insufficient to prove sustained national or international acclaim and recognition in the field of software engineering.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider providing additional and more compelling evidence to meet the required criteria or explore other visa categories that may better suit his qualifications.
