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.

dismissed EB-1A

Business Manager Specializing In Supply Chain Management And Strategic Purchasing

Q: How does the business administration, supply chain management and strategic purchasing industry affect EB-1A petition outcomes?

The business administration, supply chain management and strategic purchasing 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.

Business Administration, Supply Chain Management And Strategic Purchasing · 2025-02-26

Decision Date

2025-02-26

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 met

Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media (Not Met)

The AAO disagreed with the Director, finding the submitted media reports were primarily about the Chinese beverage industry and the employer, not specifically about the Petitioner's work or standing. Furthermore, the Petitioner failed to establish that the publications qualified as professional, major trade, or major media.

Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field (Not Met)

The Petitioner did not demonstrate that his work in strategic purchasing, logistics, digital supply chain transformation, and quality management constituted original contributions of major significance in the field beyond his employer. Expert letters lacked sufficient detail to corroborate major significance, and the contributions did not show substantial influence beyond his employers or clients.

Evidence that the alien has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation (Not Met)

While the Director and AAO agreed the Petitioner performed in a leading or critical role for his employers, the Petitioner failed to provide evidence demonstrating that these organizations had a distinguished reputation. Evidence like annual reports and company profiles did not establish their eminence, distinction, or excellence.

Why This Petition Was Denied

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to meet at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. Specifically, the AAO found the published materials were not 'about' the Petitioner's work and the publications' standing was not established. Original contributions were not shown to be of major significance beyond the employer, and expert letters lacked sufficient detail. The leading or critical role criterion was not met because the organizations' distinguished reputation was not proven. The high salary criterion was not reached as the other criteria were dispositive.

Evidence

Evidence Types

Media Coverage

Reference Letters Dependent

Reference Letters Independent

Evidence Submitted

numerous media reports pertaining to logistics and supply chain management for beverages in China
letters of support from colleagues and others in the field
overview of professional accomplishments
annual report and company profile of employers

Similar Cases

Supply Chain Manager

Logistics

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed

2025-02-13

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim. Media coverage was not specific enough to her, judging experience was limited to one competition with vague criteria, and contributions (client letters, online course) did not show major significance to the field. Expert letters lacked sufficient detail, and evidence for high salary or company equity was either proposed, not comparable, or not shown to be high relative to the field. Articles submitted were either from school years, after the filing date, or too few to establish eligibility.

General Manager

Consulting

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed

2025-04-09

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to satisfy at least three of the ten regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). The Petitioner did not provide specific arguments or evidence to overcome the Director's findings regarding memberships, published materials, original contributions, scholarly articles, artistic displays, or leading roles. Consequently, the Petitioner did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the top of the field.

Others

Food and Beverage

USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded

California 2024-08-27

The Director's decision was withdrawn and remanded because it was insufficient for review. The Director failed to acknowledge or discuss evidence and arguments provided in response to an RFE for criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i), (v), and (viii). Additionally, the decision contained few specific references to the submitted evidence or the Petitioner's explanations, and improperly dismissed evidence from 'unreliable' sources without sufficient support.

Store Manager

Retail

USCIS EB-1A dismissed

2024-12-12

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to establish that she met at least three of the ten regulatory criteria for extraordinary ability. Specifically, the Petitioner's work-related training certificates and employer-issued 'Employee of the Year' and 'Employee Referral Award' were not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized. Her role in selecting models for fashion shows was not considered judging the work of others. Her contributions, such as curating product collections and developing sales techniques, lacked evidence of major significance to the overall field. Her senior sales representative role was not proven to be leading or critical for a distinguished organization, and her salary evidence was deemed insufficient as it included post-filing data and lacked relevant comparative salary ranges.

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 Consulting cases

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2025-02-26.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed

Criteria Met 0 / 3

Evidence Types 3

EB-1A Case Data

Scraped Case Data

Total Cases 881

Success Rate 52.9%

Sustained 466

Dismissed 299

EB-1A Overview 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