Date of Decision: September 24, 2020
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Sponsor-Investigator
Field: Clinical Research and Investigations
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Scholarly Articles
The petitioner demonstrated that he met the criterion for having scholarly articles published in the field of clinical research and investigations.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser Prizes or Awards
The petitioner did not provide evidence of receiving nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in his field.
Membership in Associations
The petitioner did not demonstrate membership in associations that require outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts in the field.
Published Material
The petitioner failed to submit published material about himself in professional or major trade publications.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence showing his contributions had a major significant impact on the field of clinical research.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
The petitioner did not establish that any awards received were nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in his field.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
The petitioner did not provide material in professional or major trade publications specifically about his work and achievements.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The petitioner did not provide evidence showing how his contributions impacted the field significantly.
Participation as a Judge
Not applicable as no evidence was provided.
Membership in Associations
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence that his memberships required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
The petitioner met the criterion for having scholarly articles published.
Leading or Critical Role Performed
The petitioner’s role as a sponsor-investigator was recognized, but this alone was insufficient without meeting other criteria.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
Not applicable as no evidence was provided.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration
Not applicable as no evidence was provided.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
Not applicable as no evidence was provided.
Supporting Documentation
Evidence of the petitioner’s scholarly articles in the field of clinical research and investigations.
Documentation related to previous motions and appeals.
Conclusion
Final Determination: Motion to Reconsider and Reopen Denied
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not demonstrate that the denial of his most recent motion was incorrect based on law or policy. The evidence provided was not new and did not support the criteria required for extraordinary ability.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial and verifiable evidence to support the criteria and reapplying if they believe they qualify under a different category or with additional documentation.
