dismissed EB-1A RFE Issued

Staff Scientist Specializing In Biomedical Research

Biomedical Engineer Researcher · 2024-07-01

Decision Date
2024-07-01
Location
Missouri
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

3 of 3 criteria met
Judging the work of others (Met)

The Petitioner performed peer reviews for manuscripts from 2020 to 2022, meeting the plain language of the criterion.

Original scientific contributions of major significance (Met)

The Director determined the Petitioner met this criterion based on his research accomplishments.

Scholarly articles (Met)

The Petitioner authored scholarly articles in professional or major trade publications.

Why This Petition Was Denied

The Petitioner failed to show that his peer review work (2020-2022) or his publication and citation record set him apart from others in the field. The evidence did not establish the Petitioner as being in the upper echelon of the field despite meeting the minimum three-criteria threshold. Specific metrics for citations or publication counts were not detailed in the appellate dismissal.

Request for Evidence (RFE)

Unsuccessfully Addressed

The RFE requested further evidence to support the Petitioner's claims under the regulatory criteria. While the Petitioner provided more documentation, it did not overcome the high bar for the final merits determination.

RFE Targets
Judging the work of othersOriginal scientific contributions of major significanceScholarly articles

Evidence

Evidence Types
Peer Reviewed Publications
Judging Experience
Original Contributions
Scholarly Articles
Patents
Evidence Submitted
  • Peer reviewer for scientific journals (2020-2022)
  • Scholarly articles
  • Scientific accomplishments of major significance
  • Patent applications
  • Research funding

Similar Cases

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.
USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
Maryland 2024-07-03
The Petitioner's citation count was zero for the year 2022, and his h-index of 8 was significantly lower than the field's top researchers (h-indices of 30-70+). While he met the criteria for judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles, the evidence did not show he was among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

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

Biotechnology · Armenia

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
United States 2025-02-03
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate a one-time internationally recognized award or meet at least three of the 10 EB-1A criteria. Specifically, the AAO found that a research grant was not awarded to the Petitioner personally, and a patent from Armenia did not qualify as an award for excellence (criterion i). Memberships were deemed employment-based or lacked evidence of requiring outstanding achievements (criterion ii). Published material only cited the Petitioner's work, rather than being 'about' her, and lacked substantial discussion (criterion iii). The patent and 40+ citations were not shown to be of 'major significance' due to lack of commercialization evidence, contextual comparison, or demonstration of actual impact since 2014 (criterion v). Finally, the Petitioner's various roles were not established as 'leading or critical' for organizations with a 'distinguished reputation' (criterion viii).

Frequently Asked Questions

A dismissed EB-1A petition means USCIS found the evidence insufficient to meet the eligibility criteria. Common reasons include weak documentation, failure to meet the required number of criteria, or insufficient evidence of the claimed qualifications. Petitioners can refile with stronger evidence or explore alternative visa categories.

Browse More Cases

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-07-01.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed
RFE Issued
Criteria Met 3 / 3
Evidence Types 5

EB-1A Case Data

Scraped Case Data

Total Cases 881
Success Rate 52.9%
Sustained 466
Dismissed 299

Get Case Insights

Compare your profile against thousands of real petition outcomes. Join the waitlist for personalized analysis.

Join Waitlist