Date of Decision: September 8, 2021
Service Center: Nebraska Service Center
Form Type: Form I-140
Case Type: EB-1B (Outstanding Professor or Researcher)
Petitioner Information
Profession: Senior Research Software Development Engineer
Field: Software Engineering
Nationality: India
Summary of Decision
Initial Decision: Denied
Appeal Outcome: Dismissed
Evidentiary Criteria Analysis
Criteria Met:
- Judge of the work of others: The Beneficiary served as a program committee member for a prominent conference, contributing to the selection of papers for presentation.
- Original scientific or scholarly research contributions: The Beneficiary’s research involved developing methodologies that have been applied within the company and referenced by peers in the academic field.
- Authorship of scholarly articles: The Beneficiary has authored multiple articles that have been published in high-ranking conferences and journals.
Criteria Not Met:
- International recognition: The evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that the Beneficiary’s work is recognized as outstanding on an international level.
- Impact and influence: The Beneficiary’s contributions, though notable, did not meet the threshold of outstanding influence within the broader academic community.
- Major prizes or awards: The Beneficiary’s accolades, including a winner certificate from a challenge and a monetary award, were not deemed sufficient to establish international recognition.
Key Points from the Decision
Awards and Prizes Won:
- Autonomous Greenhouse Challenge: The Beneficiary’s team won this competition, but the accompanying certificate was not considered indicative of major international recognition.
- Monetary Award: The Beneficiary received a monetary award for his research contributions, but this was not considered significant enough to establish international recognition.
Published Materials About the Petitioner:
- Several articles discussed the Beneficiary’s team winning the Autonomous Greenhouse Challenge, but these did not emphasize the Beneficiary’s individual contributions or establish him as internationally outstanding.
Original Contributions of Major Significance:
- The Beneficiary’s research contributions were acknowledged by peers, but the impact was not considered to meet the standard of international recognition necessary for EB-1B classification.
Participation as a Judge:
- The Beneficiary served as a judge for conference papers, but the frequency and level of his participation did not suffice to demonstrate international recognition as outstanding.
Membership in Associations:
- No notable memberships in associations that require international recognition were cited.
Authorship of Scholarly Articles:
- While the Beneficiary authored several scholarly articles, the citation count and overall influence were not sufficient to establish the required level of international recognition.
Supporting Documentation
- Program Committee Invitations: Documents showing the Beneficiary’s invitations to review papers for various conferences.
- Published Articles: A collection of the Beneficiary’s published work and citation records.
- Patents and Declarations: Copies of the Beneficiary’s patent applications and supporting documents.
- Award Certificates: Certificates and emails confirming awards and recognitions received by the Beneficiary.
Conclusion
Final Determination: The appeal was dismissed.
Reasoning: The evidence, while indicating that the Beneficiary is a skilled researcher, did not establish that he is internationally recognized as outstanding in his field.
Next Steps: The petitioner may consider gathering further evidence of the Beneficiary’s international impact and recognition before reapplying or exploring other visa options.
