remanded EB-1A RFE Issued
Business Executive
Business Management · China · 2024-07-18
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
3 of 3 criteria metPublished Material (Met)
The AAO granted this criterion based on published material about the Petitioner in professional or major trade publications or other major media.
Leading or Critical Role (Met)
The Director previously concluded that the Petitioner met this criterion for performing in a leading or critical role for a distinguished organization.
High Salary (Met)
Upon reconsideration, the AAO found the Petitioner's tax documents and salary data reliably established a high salary relative to others in the field.
Why This Petition Was Remanded
The Petitioner met three criteria: leading or critical role, published material in major media, and high salary. The high salary criterion (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix)) was satisfied after the AAO determined that salary discrepancies were due to translation errors in tax documents. The Director's original decision was withdrawn because it lacked a final merits determination.
Request for Evidence (RFE)
Successfully AddressedThe RFE addressed inconsistencies in salary documentation; the Petitioner provided tax documents which were eventually found to be credible despite a translation error.
RFE Targets
High Salary
Evidence
Evidence Types
Media Coverage
High Salary
Evidence Submitted
- Evidence of performing in a leading or critical role for an organization with a distinguished reputation
- Published material about the individual in professional or major trade publications or other major media
- Evidence of commanding a high salary or other significantly high remuneration (Tax documents and salary survey data)
Similar Cases
Director
Consulting
USCIS EB-1A remanded
2024-11-26
The Director denied the petition because the Petitioner initially only met two of the required three criteria (published material and leading role). However, the AAO found that the Petitioner's 2022 remuneration of RMB 1,958,142, as evidenced by income tax records, qualified her for the high salary criterion, satisfying the minimum three criteria. Therefore, the AAO withdrew the Director's decision and remanded the case for a final merits determination.
Others
Fintech · China
USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-10-17
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate satisfaction of two additional evidentiary criteria required for EB-1A classification. Specifically, the article submitted to China Banking and Insurance News was deemed not scholarly due to lack of research detail, peer review, or citations. For the high salary criterion, inconsistencies in tax records (5,567,813.42 RMB / $782,060 in 2021 and 7,787,602.62 RMB / $1,093,854 in 2022 vs. online records and employer letter) and lack of clarity on whether salary guides included stock compensation led to the finding that high remuneration was not established. The Petitioner only met one criterion (judging), falling short of the three required.
Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
Information Technology
USCIS EB-1A remanded
2024-06-07
The case was remanded because the Director's final merits analysis was insufficient and failed to address the evidence in its totality. Specifically, the Director did not adequately evaluate the Petitioner's awards, professional memberships, and contributions to the field when determining if he had sustained national or international acclaim.
Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
Marketing and Advertising · Nigeria
USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2024-04-17
The Petitioner failed to meet the membership criterion as EMCOAN's constitution allows any content owner to join without proving outstanding achievements. The high remuneration criterion was not met because bank statements were inconsistent and did not distinguish salary from other income, and the salary surveys provided were contradictory. The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the top of his field.
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: 2024-07-18.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome remanded
RFE Issued
Criteria Met 3 / 3
Evidence Types 2
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