Date of Decision: AUG. 01, 2023
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Technical Program Manager
Field: Data Storage Technologies
Nationality: [Nationality not specified]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Remanded
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Petitioner has authored articles published in scientific journals such as Applied Physics Letters and Materials Science in Semiconductor Processing.
- Leading or Critical Role: The Petitioner performed a critical role at [Company Name] as OEM Segment Lead, responsible for business management, product development, sales, and marketing of the company’s enterprise solid state storage products, contributing to “more than $1B worth of design wins.”
- Participation as a Judge: The Petitioner provided evidence of his role as a reviewer for the International Journal of Information Management, specifically for an article on data governance and security.
Criteria Not Met:
- Invitations to Judge: Evidence of invitations to review manuscripts and serve on advisory boards was provided, but mere invitations do not meet the requirement for this criterion.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
Not applicable in this case as the Petitioner did not provide evidence of a major, internationally recognized award.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
No specific materials mentioned about the Petitioner.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
The Petitioner asserted that letters from experts established his original contributions, though these were not supported by additional evidence in the record.
Participation as a Judge
The Petitioner provided evidence of his role as a reviewer for the International Journal of Information Management, which meets this criterion.
Membership in Associations
No specific associations were mentioned.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
The Petitioner has authored articles in reputable scientific journals, meeting this criterion.
Leading or Critical Role Performed
The Petitioner demonstrated a critical role at his company, contributing significantly to its business success in data storage products.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases
Not applicable in this case.
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration
Not applicable in this case.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts
Not applicable in this case.
Supporting Documentation
- Emails and Invitations: Provided to support the criterion of participation as a judge, though found insufficient for some parts.
- Letters from Executives: Provided to establish the Petitioner’s critical role at [Company Name].
- Published Articles: Evidence of authorship in scientific journals like Applied Physics Letters and Materials Science in Semiconductor Processing.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The initial denial has been withdrawn and the case has been remanded for a final merits determination.
Reasoning: The Petitioner met the initial evidence requirement by fulfilling three of the regulatory criteria. However, the totality of the evidence must be reviewed to determine if the Petitioner has sustained national or international acclaim and is among the top in his field.
Next Steps: The Director should conduct a final merits determination, considering the totality of the evidence, including all evidentiary criteria claimed by the Petitioner and additional evidence submitted during the appeal.
