Date of Decision: JUNE 13, 2016
Service Center: Texas Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Teacher and Researcher
Field: Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM)
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Published material about the petitioner: Mentioned in professional Chinese language articles.
- Participation as a judge: Served as a peer reviewer for a journal in her field.
- Authorship of scholarly articles: Authored multiple scholarly articles, although there was an issue with proving the publication.
Criteria Not Met:
- Documentation for published materials: Did not provide objective evidence like copies or photocopies of the articles.
- Proper translation and certification: Failed to provide certified translations of articles, impacting the credibility and evaluation of her submissions.
- Sufficient evidence of extraordinary ability: Lacked compelling evidence that her contributions were recognized nationally or internationally at the top of her field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- None specified in the review.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- Articles written about her contributions to TCM were mentioned, but the lack of objective evidence like physical copies or recognized translations weakened her case.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- The contributions, while significant within her field, were not documented well enough to demonstrate national or international acclaim.
Participation as a Judge:
- Served as a peer reviewer, which the USCIS acknowledged, but it was noted that such roles are common and not indicative of the highest acclaim without additional, distinctive evidence.
Membership in Associations:
- Not specifically mentioned in the review.
Authorship of scholarly articles:
- Authored several articles but failed to provide the original publications or certified translations.
Supporting Documentation
- Notarized translations that were not specific enough.
- Letters from journal editors acknowledging her role but lacking in detailed proof of standing within the field.
- Photocopies of articles with inadequate translation certification.
Conclusion
Final Determination:
The petitioner did not provide adequate evidence to meet the criteria for classification as an individual of extraordinary ability. The lack of certified documentation, the limited scope and reach of the published works, and the generic nature of supporting letters failed to establish her standing at the top of her field.
Reasoning:
The USCIS concluded that the petitioner did not fulfill the necessary evidentiary criteria, lacking in both quantity and quality as required by the standards for extraordinary ability.
Next Steps:
The recommendation for the petitioner would be to gather more substantial and well-documented evidence, focusing on certified translations, objective proofs like copies of publications, and more specific letters of recommendation that detail her impact and standing in the field.
