dismissed EB-1A
Civil Engineer
Water Resources Engineering · Iraq · 2024-10-04
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 metAuthorship of scholarly articles (Met)
The Director and AAO agreed that the Petitioner met this criterion through his authorship of scholarly articles.
Participation as a judge of the work of others (Met)
The Director and AAO agreed that the Petitioner met this criterion through his participation as a judge.
Membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements (Not Met)
The Petitioner's memberships in the American Society of Civil Engineers, Community Surface Dynamics Modeling System, and Iraqi Engineers Union did not demonstrate that these associations require outstanding achievements for membership, as judged by experts.
Original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance (Not Met)
While the Petitioner made original research contributions, he failed to demonstrate that these contributions, including published articles and citations, were of major significance or had a remarkable impact on the broader field of water resources engineering.
Performance in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation (Not Met)
The Petitioner's roles on a doctoral project and within a university's civil engineering department were not shown to be leading or critical for organizations with a distinguished reputation, as a project is not an organization and the university's rankings were insufficient.
Why This Petition Was Denied
The appeal is dismissed because the Petitioner failed to provide initial evidence of a one-time achievement or meet at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria. Specifically, the Petitioner did not demonstrate that his association memberships required outstanding achievements, that his original contributions (including published articles and citations) were of major significance to the field of water resources engineering, or that his roles were leading/critical for organizations with distinguished reputations. The AAO found the evidence insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim, concluding the Petitioner is not among the small percentage at the very top of his field.
Evidence
Evidence Types
Peer Reviewed Publications
Citations
Reference Letters Dependent
Professional Memberships
Judging Experience
Original Contributions
Evidence Submitted
- authorship of scholarly articles
- participation as a judge of the work of others in his field
- membership in the American Society of Civil Engineers
- membership in the terrestrial working group of the Community Surface Dynamics Modeling System
- membership in the Iraqi Engineers Union (IEU)
- articles co-authored by the Petitioner published in scientific journals and at conferences
- citations to published papers and presentations
- reference letters from peers, colleagues, and other experts
- work on feasibility studies for water and sewage projects in Iraq
- leadership of a river monitoring project
Similar Cases
Civil Engineer
Engineering · Peru
USCIS EB-1A remanded
2024-09-10
The Director denied the petition because the Petitioner only demonstrated meeting two of the required three criteria (judging and scholarly articles). The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) reversed the Director's finding on the awards criterion, concluding that the Petitioner did receive a nationally recognized award (the medal from the National Council of the _________ in 2022 for outstanding professional work in engineering in Peru). With three criteria now met (awards, judging, and scholarly articles), the AAO withdrew the Director's decision and remanded the case for a final merits determination, as the Director had not reached this stage of evaluation.
Engineer
Engineering
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2025-03-24
The decision was withdrawn and remanded because the Director failed to consider evidence submitted in response to the RFE and misidentified the Petitioner's professional field. The AAO determined a de novo review was necessary to ensure all evidence, including that related to engineering, is properly evaluated against the regulatory criteria.
Civil Engineer
Engineering
USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
Texas 2024-11-12
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility for extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found that the Petitioner only met one of the ten criteria (judging), falling short of the required three. Specifically, the Petitioner's membership in ASCE did not demonstrate 'outstanding achievements', published material lacked required details and major media status, original contributions were not shown to be of 'major significance' beyond his employers, and his salary was not 'significantly high' compared to others in the field.
Mechanical Engineer
Engineering
USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-09-05
The AAO affirmed that the petitioner did not meet the 'original contributions of major significance' criterion (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v)), finding that evidence of published work, citations, and expert testimonials did not sufficiently demonstrate widespread implementation or major impact beyond the petitioner's employers. The AAO also concluded that the petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim, noting insufficient evidence for the notability of the conference where the petitioner judged and a lack of evidence showing widespread application or significant impact of the petitioner's research in mechanical engineering. The motion to reconsider was dismissed because the petitioner did not establish that the prior decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy, or incorrect based on the evidence in the record at the time of the decision.
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: 2024-10-04.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome dismissed
Criteria Met 2 / 3
Evidence Types 6
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