Date of Decision: July 27, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1B (Outstanding Professor or Researcher)
Petitioner Information
Profession: Staff Scientist
Field: Medical Electronics
Nationality: Not Specified
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Sustained
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Judge of the Work of Others: The Beneficiary has peer-reviewed numerous articles for highly regarded international journals in the field of medical electronics, demonstrating international recognition.
- Original Scientific or Scholarly Research Contributions: The Beneficiary has made significant contributions to the field, including pioneering methods in clinical imaging and mental disorder detection.
- Authorship of Scholarly Articles: The Beneficiary has authored numerous articles published in internationally circulated journals, with his work widely cited and applied by others in the field.
Criteria Not Met:
No criteria were specifically listed as unmet, as the appeal was sustained based on the evidence provided.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won
- Summary of Findings: No awards or prizes were mentioned in the decision.
- Key Quotes or References: Not applicable.
Published Materials About the Petitioner
- Summary of Findings: The Beneficiary’s work has been extensively cited in the field, demonstrating the impact and recognition of his contributions.
- Key Quotes or References: Google Scholar indicated hundreds of citations to the Beneficiary’s published work, showing significant impact.
Original Contributions of Major Significance
- Summary of Findings: The Beneficiary developed methods for clinical imaging and mental disorder detection that have been incorporated into commercial products and are recognized as significant advancements in the field.
- Key Quotes or References: “This pioneering method calculates the sequence in seconds compared to other methods that require 30-60 minutes.”
Participation as a Judge
- Summary of Findings: The Beneficiary served as a peer reviewer for several respected journals, chosen based on his expertise and international recognition.
- Key Quotes or References: Letters from journal editors indicated that reviewers are selected for their expertise and stature in the field.
Membership in Associations
- Summary of Findings: Not specifically mentioned in the document.
- Key Quotes or References: Not applicable.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles
- Summary of Findings: The Beneficiary authored numerous articles in international journals, with significant citation counts demonstrating their influence.
- Key Quotes or References: “The Beneficiary’s scholarly articles have garnered an extensive number of citations internationally.”
Supporting Documentation
- Letters from Journal Editors: Confirmed the Beneficiary’s role as a peer reviewer based on his expertise.
- Impact Factor Rankings: Provided evidence of the international stature of the journals for which the Beneficiary reviewed.
- Reference Letters: Detailed the Beneficiary’s contributions and their significance to the academic field.
- Google Scholar Citations: Showed the widespread impact and application of the Beneficiary’s research.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was sustained, and the Beneficiary was recognized as an outstanding researcher in his field.
Reasoning: The totality of the evidence, including the Beneficiary’s peer review work, original contributions, and extensive publications, demonstrated his international recognition.
Next Steps: The Beneficiary may proceed with the immigration process based on the sustained appeal.
Download the Full Petition Review Here
