remanded EB-1A
Chief Legal Officer
Aviation Industry · Russia · 2024-04-17
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.
Why This Petition Was Remanded
The decision was remanded because the record was incomplete and the Director failed to analyze if the Petitioner's role as a chief legal officer in the aviation industry qualified under the 'business' category. The Director also failed to conduct the required two-part analysis, including whether the Petitioner met at least three of the ten initial evidentiary criteria.
Evidence
Evidence Types
Awards
Evidence Submitted
- Evidence related to an award from the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation
- Curriculum vitae
- Statement in support of the petition
- Evidence of leading customer negotiations and developing digitization strategies
Similar Cases
Chief Financial Officer (CFO)
Financial Services · Canada
USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
Ontario 2024-04-11
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to meet at least three EB-1A criteria. The membership criterion was unmet as no bylaws or governing principles were provided; the published material criterion was unmet because the articles were about the employer's projects; and the judging criterion lacked specific dates and competition titles. Additionally, the original contributions were deemed to have impact only on specific companies rather than the field as a whole.
Paralegal
Legal Services · Kazakhstan
USCIS EB-1A remanded
New York 2025-01-30
The Director denied the petition because the petitioner did not establish eligibility under at least three of the ten criteria, specifically rejecting claims for awards and published material. Additionally, the Director concluded that the practice of law does not fall within the enumerated fields for extraordinary ability. The AAO withdrew this decision, agreeing with the petitioner that law can qualify under 'science or art' or 'business', and remanded the case for a merits determination on the remaining four claimed criteria.
General Manager
Pharmaceuticals
USCIS EB-1A remanded
Washington, D.C. 2024-10-04
The Director's decision was withdrawn and the matter remanded because the Director applied an incorrect standard when evaluating the 'original contributions' criterion, viewing the Petitioner's business contributions through the lens of 'scientific contributions'. The AAO affirmed that the Petitioner met the 'leading or critical role' and 'high remuneration' criteria, but not 'memberships' or 'published material'. The case was sent back for a proper evaluation of the business contributions and a final merits determination if three criteria are met.
Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
Artificial Intelligence · Chile
USCIS EB-1A remanded
U.S. 2024-12-18
The AAO withdrew the Director's decision because the Petitioner met at least three evidentiary criteria (judging, scholarly articles, and original contributions of major significance), which was sufficient for a final merits determination. However, the petition was remanded because the Petitioner did not establish her intent to continue working in her field in the United States, as required by Section 203(b)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act, an issue not addressed by the Director.
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: 2024-04-17.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome remanded
Evidence Types 1
EB-1A Case Data
Scraped Case Data
Total Cases 919
Success Rate 53.0%
Sustained 487
Dismissed 315
Related Pages
Get Case Insights
Compare your profile against thousands of real petition outcomes. Join the waitlist for personalized analysis.
Join Waitlist