Date of Decision: May 24, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1B (Outstanding Professor or Researcher)
Petitioner Information
Profession: Assistant Professor
Field: International Economics, Technology, and Development
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Participation as a Judge: The beneficiary served as a reviewer for academic journals such as Vikalpa: Journal for Decision Makers and Economic Modelling and participated as an external examiner for a doctoral thesis.
- Original Contributions of Major Significance: The beneficiary made contributions in areas such as labor economics and the impact of technology on employment, though the contributions were not deemed to have significant international impact.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The beneficiary authored several scholarly articles, including papers in journals like Applied Economics and Indian Journal of Labour Economics.
Criteria Not Met:
- Awards and Prizes: No significant awards or prizes demonstrating international recognition were provided.
- Published Materials About the Petitioner: References to the beneficiary’s work in other publications were found but were not deemed sufficient to establish international recognition.
- Membership in Associations: No evidence provided demonstrating membership in significant associations that contribute to international recognition.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won: The record did not include awards or prizes that could demonstrate international recognition in the academic field.
Published Materials About the Petitioner: The petition included citations of the beneficiary’s work in other academic publications, but these citations did not rise to the level of demonstrating international recognition.
Original Contributions of Major Significance: While the beneficiary’s research was acknowledged in areas such as labor market impacts and technology, the contributions were not considered to have made a substantial impact on the international stage.
Participation as a Judge: The beneficiary’s role as a reviewer for academic journals was recognized, but it was determined that this did not set her apart sufficiently in the field.
Membership in Associations: The petition did not include evidence of membership in professional associations that would contribute to the beneficiary’s international recognition.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The beneficiary authored several papers, but the citation rate and impact of these works were not sufficient to establish outstanding international recognition.
Supporting Documentation
- Letters of Support: Included letters from academic peers attesting to the beneficiary’s contributions and expertise.
- Research Papers: Submitted copies of the beneficiary’s publications in various journals.
- Citation Data: Provided citation information from Google Scholar to support the impact of the beneficiary’s work.
- Conference Participation: Documentation of the beneficiary’s participation in academic conferences.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed due to insufficient evidence of international recognition as an outstanding professor or researcher. The provided evidence, although meeting the initial criteria, was not sufficient in the totality of the case to demonstrate that the beneficiary stands apart in the field on an international level.
Reasoning: The key reason for the dismissal was the lack of evidence showing that the beneficiary’s work has had a substantial impact on the international academic community.
Next Steps: It is recommended that the petitioner gathers more robust evidence of the beneficiary’s international influence, such as higher citation rates, more significant awards, and roles in prestigious academic organizations.
