dismissed EB-1A RFE Issued
Sound Engineer And Technical Director
Broadcasting Industry · 2022-08-04
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
0 of 3 criteria metJudging the work of others (Not Met)
Letters lacked specific dates of service and details regarding the petitioner's authority or influence in determining student outcomes.
Original contributions of major significance (Not Met)
The petitioner's 'golden ear' ability and techniques were valued by employers but not shown to have widely impacted the field or been adopted by others.
High salary (Not Met)
Comparative data provided was too general and did not establish that the petitioner's earnings were high relative to others in similar positions and locations.
Leading or critical role (Not Met)
The AAO reserved this issue as the failure to meet other criteria was already dispositive.
Why This Petition Was Denied
The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner failed to satisfy at least three of the ten regulatory criteria. Specifically, the judging evidence was uncorroborated, the 'golden ear' ability was not shown to be an original contribution of major significance, and the salary data provided lacked appropriate comparative metrics for the specific job titles in the relevant geographic location.
Request for Evidence (RFE)
Unsuccessfully AddressedThe RFE asked for corroborating evidence of judging, proof that the petitioner's techniques were widely used (like patents or licenses), and specific salary comparisons. The petitioner provided some tax documents and general statistics that did not meet the evidentiary standard.
RFE Targets
Judging the work of othersOriginal contributions of major significanceHigh salary
Evidence
Evidence Types
Judging Experience
Original Contributions
High Salary
Patents
Reference Letters Dependent
Evidence Submitted
- Letters from professors and sound engineering professionals
- Letters from actors and clients attesting to skills
- Evidence of a 'golden ear' unique physical ability
- Patent issued on 09/21/2020 for sound technology (submitted on appeal)
- Licensing contract dated 11/25/2020
- Participation in examination commissions for graduating students
- Income tax returns (Forms) for 2018 and 2019
Similar Cases
Entrepreneur
Automotive
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
Texas 2024-02-07
The case was remanded because the Director's decision was insufficient for review, having copied analysis verbatim from a prior denied petition rather than evaluating the new evidence. Specifically, the Director failed to properly assess the 'judging' and 'high salary' criteria based on the current record. The AAO confirmed the Petitioner met the 'scholarly articles' and 'leading or critical roles' criteria but required a re-evaluation of the others to see if the three-criterion threshold was met.
Musician
Music
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2024-08-29
The Director's decision was withdrawn because it contained 'repetitive and generic' language from unrelated cases, depriving the petitioner of a fair adjudication. Specifically, the Director mischaracterized the musician petitioner as a medical professional and failed to address the 'original contributions' criterion entirely. The case was remanded to determine if the petitioner meets at least three of the five claimed criteria: awards, memberships, published material, original contributions, and leading roles.
Entrepreneur
Information Technology
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2024-12-26
The AAO withdrew the Director's decision and remanded the case because the Director's analysis was insufficient. The decision did not adequately explain the reasons for concluding that the Petitioner failed to satisfy five claimed criteria (lesser awards, published materials, original contributions, leading or critical role, and high salary), nor did it discuss the evidence submitted in response to the RFE. The Director's analysis regarding the Petitioner's intent to continue working was also found to be copied verbatim from the RFE, indicating a lack of proper evaluation of the submitted evidence.
Business Development Manager
Telecommunications
USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-09-12
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to satisfy at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. Specifically, the Petitioner only met the 'judging' criterion. The 'original contributions of major significance' criterion was not met as the Petitioner's product development work, guest lecture, book, and financial work were not shown to have had substantial influence beyond his employers or clients, nor were they considered to be of major significance in the field. The 'scholarly articles' criterion was not met because the submitted book was not considered a scholarly article and was not shown to be published in a professional or major trade publication or other major media for learned persons. The AAO also noted that the Petitioner did not demonstrate national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field.
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: 2022-08-04.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome dismissed
RFE Issued
Criteria Met 0 / 3
Evidence Types 5
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