Acting President And Vice President For Academic Affairs

The Petitioner satisfied at least three regulatory criteria: published material, leading or critical role, and scholarly articles. The AAO found the Petitioner's documentation of article authorship met the scholarly articles criterion and his detailed plans satisfied the requirement to continue work in his area of expertise. The case was remanded for a final merits determination.

The Petitioner satisfied the minimum three criteria required for EB-1A classification. The Director's initial finding that she lacked intent to work in the field was overturned due to a prospective job offer from a U.S. medical school. The case was remanded for a final merits determination to evaluate whether the Petitioner has sustained national or international acclaim.

The Director's decision was withdrawn because the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) found that the Petitioner had satisfied a third evidentiary criterion, high salary, in addition to the two criteria (authorship of scholarly articles and leading or critical role) previously acknowledged by the Director. This fulfillment of three criteria overcame the initial basis for denial, necessitating a remand for the Director to conduct a final merits determination on whether the beneficiary has sustained national or international acclaim and is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.