Date of Decision: April 3, 2018
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Sustainable Agriculture Researcher
Field: Sciences
Nationality: Not specified in the document
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Judging the Work of Others:
The Petitioner met the criterion of judging the work of others by peer-reviewing articles for professional publications.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner authored several scholarly articles in professional publications, which satisfied this criterion.
Criteria Not Met:
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner submitted publications, citation evidence, and letters of recommendation. However, the evidence did not demonstrate that the work constituted original contributions of major significance in the field of sustainable agriculture. The citations and expert letters failed to show a substantial impact on the field or widespread adoption and influence of the Petitioner’s work.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
There were no major internationally recognized awards presented by the Petitioner as evidence.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
The Petitioner’s published work, although in highly ranked journals, did not meet the threshold of being of “major significance” within the field. The publications and presentations lacked documented substantial impact and significance in the field as required by the regulations.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
Despite assertions and supporting letters, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the Petitioner’s contributions were of major significance in the sustainable agriculture field. The citations and expert letters did not reflect that the Petitioner’s work had a transformative effect or was widely recognized as significant within the field.
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner fulfilled this criterion by peer-reviewing articles for professional journals.
Membership in Associations:
No specific memberships in associations were highlighted or deemed significant for this case.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
This criterion was satisfied with the Petitioner authoring several scholarly articles.
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
There was no substantial evidence provided to support a leading or critical role in distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
Not applicable.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
No evidence was provided to demonstrate a high salary or remuneration indicative of extraordinary ability.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts:
Not applicable.
Supporting Documentation
The petitioner submitted a variety of supporting documents including:
- Publications and citation reports
- Letters of recommendation from colleagues and experts in the field
- Reports and articles authored by the petitioner
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The Petitioner did not meet the required initial evidence of either a qualifying one-time achievement or documents that satisfy at least three of the ten criteria listed. The submitted evidence, when considered in totality, did not establish the level of expertise required for the classification sought.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence or focus on achieving a major, internationally recognized award or fulfilling at least three of the specified criteria more conclusively before reapplying.
