remanded EB-1A RFE Issued
Bioinformatics Research Scientist
Bioinformatics Research Scientist · China · 2023-01-12
This case is from a USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) appeal decision. Appeal cases represent a subset of petitions and may not reflect typical outcomes.
Framework Evaluation
2 of 3 criteria metJudging the work of others (Met)
The Petitioner peer-reviewed manuscripts submitted for publication in several scientific journals.
Authorship of scholarly articles (Met)
The Petitioner published scholarly articles in scientific journals such as Nature Communications and the Journal of the National Academy of Sciences.
Original contributions of major significance (Partially Met)
The AAO found the Director's evaluation of this criterion to be conclusory and factually flawed, requiring a re-examination on remand.
Why This Petition Was Remanded
The Director's decision was withdrawn because it contained fundamental factual errors, such as referencing journals the Petitioner never published in and using incorrect pronouns. Additionally, the Director failed to provide a specific analysis of the 'original contributions of major significance' criterion and the record of proceedings was found to be incomplete regarding the RFE response. The Petitioner successfully met the judging and scholarly articles criteria.
Request for Evidence (RFE)
Unsuccessfully AddressedThe RFE requested further evidence of original contributions of major significance; the response included an updated citation record and detailed accounts of published work.
RFE Targets
Original contributions of major significance
Evidence
Evidence Types
Peer Reviewed Publications
Citations
Reference Letters Independent
Reference Letters Dependent
Grants
Judging Experience
Original Contributions
Evidence Submitted
- Peer review of manuscripts for several scientific journals
- Published scholarly articles in Nature Communications and the Journal of the National Academy of Sciences
- Google Scholar citation record
- Journal rankings and impact factors
- Documentation of 'notable citations'
- Information regarding governmental funding for previous work
Similar Cases
Research Scientist
Biotechnology
USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2024-06-17
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner only met one criterion (scholarly articles). The claims for awards and memberships were deemed waived due to lack of developed argument on appeal, and the original contributions claim was rejected as it was raised under a new criterion for the first time on appeal. The record failed to demonstrate the sustained national or international acclaim required for the top of the field.
Research Scientist
Biotechnology · Germany
USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2024-09-27
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to meet at least three of the ten EB-1A criteria. While she met the 'scholarly articles' criterion (publishing in The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and PLOS One), she did not provide sufficient evidence for 'awards' (a poster prize at EAACI lacked specific award details or criteria, and the RFE for primary evidence was not resolved) or 'original contributions of major significance' (52 cumulative citations across three articles were not shown to be unusually high for her field, and expert letters lacked specific corroborating details of major impact or widespread implementation). The AAO concluded she had not demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim.
Research Scientist
Research and Development · India
USCIS EB-1A remanded
Texas 2024-07-25
The Petitioner satisfied three criteria: judging (peer review), original contributions (1,100+ citations with three articles cited over 100 times), and scholarly articles. The AAO withdrew the Director's denial because the evidence cumulatively met the regulatory threshold for original contributions of major significance. The matter was remanded for a final merits determination to assess sustained national or international acclaim.
Research Scientist
Agriculture
USCIS EB-1A remanded
2025-01-16
The Petitioner met three criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and original contributions of major significance. She authored approximately 20 peer-reviewed articles with a significant number of citations. Expert letters confirmed her 'pioneer studies' in post-thaw recovery and her development of a unique computational pipeline for metabolome-transcriptome associations.
Frequently Asked Questions
A remanded EB-1A petition means the case was sent back to the field office for further review. This happens when procedural errors are found or additional evidence should be considered. It is neither an approval nor a denial.
Browse More Cases
Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2023-01-12.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome remanded
RFE Issued
Criteria Met 2 / 3
Evidence Types 7
EB-1A Case Data
Scraped Case Data
Total Cases 881
Success Rate 52.9%
Sustained 466
Dismissed 299
Related Pages
Get Case Insights
Compare your profile against thousands of real petition outcomes. Join the waitlist for personalized analysis.
Join Waitlist