Date of Decision: March 29, 2018
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Supervisor of Thermal Heavy Oil Steam Flood Recovery
Field: Thermal Heavy Oil Steam Flood Recovery
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner documented his role in the Heavy Oil Steam Flood Specialist Program (HOSFSP) within his company, demonstrating that he has contributed significantly to the success of his company.
High Salary:
The petitioner provided evidence showing that his salary is approximately twice as much as the wages of others in his field earning at the high end of the spectrum.
Criteria Not Met:
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not meet the criterion for membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements, as his participation in the HOSFSP was limited to his employment and did not involve a selection process judged by recognized national or international experts.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner’s involvement in providing feedback for employees’ performance appraisals and other informal capacities did not equate to participation as a judge of the work of others in a formal capacity.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that his methodologies for progressive cavity pumps and surface steam distribution were widely implemented or significantly influenced the greater field outside his company.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
Not applicable.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
Not applicable.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner’s methodologies for progressive cavity pumps and surface steam distribution were mentioned, but there was insufficient evidence of their impact and implementation in the broader field.
Participation as a Judge:
The petitioner’s informal involvement in providing feedback and advice did not satisfy the criterion of formally judging the work of others.
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner’s role in the HOSFSP did not meet the membership criterion as it was part of his employment rather than an association requiring outstanding achievements judged by experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
Not applicable.
Leading or Critical Role:
The petitioner performed a critical role within his company, contributing to its successes, which was acknowledged by the Director.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner’s salary was confirmed to be significantly higher than the average in his field, demonstrating his high remuneration.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The supporting documents included evidence of the petitioner’s role in the HOSFSP, letters from colleagues and supervisors, salary comparisons, and documentation of methodologies developed by the petitioner. However, these documents were insufficient to meet all the required criteria.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a one-time achievement or documentation satisfying at least three of the ten criteria necessary for the EB1 Extraordinary Ability classification. While he demonstrated a high salary and a critical role in his organization, he failed to provide sufficient evidence for other claimed criteria.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may need to gather more substantial evidence or consider alternative immigration pathways that may be more appropriate for his circumstances. Consulting with an immigration attorney could provide further guidance on how to strengthen the case for future appeals or applications.
