Date of Decision: July 22, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Surgeon
Field: Medical Surgery
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition on the grounds that the Petitioner did not establish a one-time achievement (a major, internationally recognized award) or meet at least three of the required evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability classification.
Key Points from the Decision
One-Time Achievement
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide evidence of a major, internationally recognized award that would qualify as a one-time achievement demonstrating extraordinary ability.
Awards and Prizes Won
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not establish receipt of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence in his field. The provided documentation did not adequately support the claim that the awards were significant within the field of medical surgery.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to establish that published materials about him were in major trade or professional publications or other major media. The articles provided did not focus primarily on the Petitioner’s professional achievements and did not demonstrate the sources qualified as major media.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate original contributions of major significance in the field of medical surgery. The letters provided praised the Petitioner’s work but lacked specific, detailed information on how his contributions significantly impacted the field.
Participation as a Judge
Summary of findings: The Petitioner provided evidence of participation as a judge in medical competitions and conferences. However, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that these roles involved judging the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization for which classification is sought.
Membership in Associations
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not provide evidence of membership in associations that require outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. The memberships cited were based on participation and professional affiliation rather than outstanding achievements.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
Summary of findings: The Petitioner authored several scholarly articles in reputable medical journals, but the evidence provided was insufficient to establish this criterion under the extraordinary ability classification.
Leading or Critical Role Performed
Summary of findings: The Petitioner claimed to have held leading roles in various medical institutions. However, the evidence provided, including letters and certificates, was insufficient to establish that these institutions had distinguished reputations or that the Petitioner’s roles were critical to their success. The documentation did not adequately support the claim that the Petitioner’s roles were leading or critical.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration
Summary of findings: The Petitioner did not establish that he commanded a high salary or remuneration relative to others in his field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
Summary of findings: No evidence provided.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the ten criteria. The Petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field. The totality of the evidence did not support a finding of the required acclaim and recognition for the classification sought.
