Date of Decision: August 8, 2016
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Theoretical Physicist
Field: Theoretical Physics
Nationality: Not specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Participation as a Judge:
The Petitioner met this criterion by serving as a referee for the journal.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner met this criterion with articles published in journals and conference proceedings dating from 1997 to 1999.
Criteria Not Met:
Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards:
The Petitioner documented inclusion in biographic volumes and received accolades. However, these did not establish national or international recognition.
Membership in Associations:
The Petitioner did not provide evidence of membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The Petitioner’s work was considered to have potential future significance, but it did not demonstrate a significant impact in the field to date.
Display of Work in Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases:
The Petitioner’s presentations were considered under scholarly articles, not artistic exhibitions.
Leading or Critical Role:
The Petitioner did not establish a leading or critical role in recognized organizations.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The Petitioner provided evidence of biographic volume inclusions and accolades, but these were not sufficient for national or international recognition.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
While the Petitioner’s work was acknowledged, it did not demonstrate significant current impact in the field. The potential for future significance was noted, but this does not meet the regulatory requirement.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
The Petitioner’s articles and presentations were acknowledged but lacked evidence of substantial influence in the field.
Supporting Documentation
- Inclusion in Biographic Volumes: Provided documentation but did not establish the national or international significance of these recognitions.
- Participation as a Referee: Confirmed role as a referee for a journal.
- Published Articles: Articles from 1997-1999 were considered, but the Petitioner did not provide recent publications or evidence of significant citations.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal is dismissed.
Reasoning: The Petitioner did not meet the initial regulatory criteria of extraordinary ability. The evidence provided did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the top percentage in the field.
Next Steps: The Petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of current recognition and impact in the field before any future submissions.
