Date of Decision: March 12, 2020
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB1 Extraordinary Ability
Petitioner Information
Profession: Vice President of Talent Acquisition
Field: Business (Talent Acquisition)
Nationality: [Not specified in the document]
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Denied
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
Criterion 1: Leading or Critical Role
The petitioner demonstrated that he played a leading or critical role in organizations with a distinguished reputation. The petitioner provided detailed letters from his current and former managers at [Company 1] and [Company 2], which established that he held critical roles within these companies.
Criterion 2: High Salary or Remuneration
The petitioner provided documentation of his past earnings along with comparative wage information from several reliable sources. This evidence demonstrated that he received significantly high remuneration in comparison to others in his occupation who work in the same geographic area.
Criteria Not Met:
Criterion 1: Lesser Nationally or Internationally Recognized Prizes or Awards
The petitioner claimed several awards, including the 2019 [HR Retailer Leader of the Year] and multiple National Training Awards. However, the evidence did not establish that these awards were nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in the field. The awards given to [Company 3] were not directly awarded to the petitioner himself.
Criterion 2: Membership in Associations
The petitioner claimed membership in the [Association Name], but the evidence did not establish that this membership required outstanding achievements judged by recognized national or international experts. The membership criteria appeared to be based primarily on educational qualifications and work experience rather than on outstanding achievements.
Criterion 3: Original Contributions of Major Significance
The petitioner claimed to have made significant contributions, including redesigning the Bachelor of Business in Retail Management program. However, the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that these contributions were of major significance in the field.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of receiving nationally or internationally recognized awards for excellence in the field. The evidence showed that the awards were given to his employer rather than to him individually.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: Not applicable
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
The petitioner claimed contributions such as redesigning educational programs but did not provide sufficient evidence of their significant impact on the field.
Participation as a Judge: Not applicable
Membership in Associations:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence of memberships requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: Not applicable
Leading or Critical Role Performed:
The petitioner successfully demonstrated that he held leading or critical roles within distinguished organizations.
Artistic Exhibitions or Showcases: Not applicable
Evidence of High Salary or Remuneration:
The petitioner demonstrated that his salary was high relative to others in the field.
Commercial Successes in the Performing Arts: Not applicable
Supporting Documentation
Articles and Publications: Various articles and publications about the petitioner’s work.
Letters of Reference: Letters from colleagues and associates detailing the petitioner’s contributions and roles.
Award Documentation: Information about the awards claimed by the petitioner.
Salary Information: Documentation of the petitioner’s salary compared to industry standards.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning:
The petitioner did not provide sufficient evidence to meet at least three of the required criteria for demonstrating extraordinary ability. The evidence submitted did not establish national or international recognition of his achievements or demonstrate major contributions to the field of talent acquisition. The petitioner did not show that his professional accomplishments placed him among the small percentage at the very top of his field.
Next Steps:
The petitioner may consider gathering more substantial evidence of extraordinary ability, focusing on awards with national or international recognition, significant contributions, and other achievements that demonstrate standing at the top of the field. Exploring other immigration options that may be more suitable given the evidence available is also recommended.
