How common are denied EB-1A petitions?

EB-1A petition outcomes vary based on the strength of evidence, the specific criteria addressed, and the adjudicating officer. Each case is evaluated individually based on its own merits and documentation.

How does the automotive industry industry affect EB-1A petition outcomes?

The automotive industry sector has unique considerations for EB-1A petitions. USCIS evaluates whether the petitioner's qualifications and contributions align with the specific requirements of the visa category. Industry context matters for demonstrating the significance and impact of the petitioner's work.

dismissed EB-1A

Paintless Dent Repair Specialist

Automotive Industry · Brazil · 2024-07-11

Decision Date

2024-07-11

Location

Florida

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 met

Published Material (Met)

The Director determined that the Petitioner satisfied the criteria for published material about him.

Judging (Met)

The Director determined that the Petitioner satisfied the criteria for participation as a judge of the work of others.

Memberships (Not Met)

Membership in NAPDRT did not require outstanding achievements, and ARC certification was obtained after the filing date.

Original Contributions (Not Met)

Testimonials described the Petitioner as skilled but failed to identify specific original contributions that broadly impacted the PDR industry.

Leading or Critical Role (Not Met)

The Petitioner did not establish that his roles as an instructor or business owner were for organizations with a distinguished reputation.

High Salary (Not Met)

The Petitioner failed to provide comparative data distinguishing his earnings as a business owner from his salary as a PDR technician.

Why This Petition Was Denied

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner only met two of the ten regulatory criteria (published material and judging). Specifically, evidence for original contributions lacked objective proof of broad impact, and the high salary claim was unsupported as the Petitioner's earnings as a business owner were not comparable to technician salaries.

Evidence

Evidence Types

Published Material

Judging Experience

Professional Memberships

Original Contributions

High Salary

Reference Letters Dependent

Evidence Submitted

Published material about the Petitioner
Participation as a judge of the work of others
Membership in National Alliance of PDR Technicians (NAPDRT)
ARC certification (post-filing)
Recommendation letters from industry professionals
Advisory opinions from university professors
Business ownership of Dent Away in Florida and Brazil

Similar Cases

Auto Mechanic

Automotive · Uzbekistan

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed

Pennsylvania 2025-01-17

The AAO dismissed the appeal because the Petitioner failed to meet at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria. Specifically, the Petitioner did not establish that membership in ASME required outstanding achievements, nor did they prove a leading or critical role for an organization with a distinguished reputation. While the judging criterion was met, the other two claimed criteria were not, leading to a failure to meet the minimum three criteria. The issue of high remuneration and the suitability of the Petitioner's field (mechanic) for EB-1A were reserved.

Engineer

Engineering · Egypt

USCIS EB-1A dismissed

2025-01-23

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner only satisfied one criterion (judging) out of the required three. The evidence for memberships was rejected as it described certification rather than membership; original contributions were not supported by independent evidence of industry-wide adoption; and the leading/critical role evidence lacked specific metrics to show importance to the organizations' overall activities.

Others

Automotive

USCIS EB-1A dismissed

Florida 2025-03-19

The Petitioner did not meet the memberships criterion because certificates and articles of organization lacked proper English translations and one membership was obtained after the filing date. Claims for original contributions and leading roles were reserved as the Petitioner could not meet the minimum three-criteria threshold. No evidence of a high salary was provided on appeal, and the overall record failed to show the Petitioner is in the upper echelon of the field.

Industrial Engineer

Automotive

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed

2024-07-16

The Petitioner's judging experience was limited to two instances in a single year, and his publication record was considered sparse compared to top experts with 50-60 works. While his quality control methodology was adopted into the AFS Mold and Core Test Handbook, his work at his current employer was deemed speculative regarding industry-wide impact. Ultimately, the record did not show a career of acclaimed work or sustained recognition required for EB-1A classification.

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

More dismissed cases More Automotive cases More cases from Brazil

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-07-11.

Browse all cases

At 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

EB-1A Overview EB-1A in Brazil All EB-1A Cases EB-1A Dashboard

Get Case Insights

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

Join Waitlist