remanded EB-1A
Construction Industry Executive And Entrepreneur
Construction Industry · Ethiopia · 2024-11-26
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
3 of 3 criteria metPublished material about the noncitizen in professional or major trade publications or other major media (Met)
The Director's finding that the Petitioner met the evidentiary criterion regarding published material about him was supported by the record.
High salary or other significantly high remuneration for services (Met)
The Director's finding that the Petitioner met the evidentiary criterion regarding his commandment of a high salary in his field was supported by the record.
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence (Met)
The Petitioner demonstrated receipt of nationally recognized awards for excellence in his field from Ethiopian government ministries and a construction contractors association, contrary to the Director's finding.
Original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field (Not Met)
The AAO reserved consideration of this criterion as it was unnecessary for the decision to remand, implying it was not sufficiently met at this stage.
Performance in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments with distinguished reputations (Not Met)
The AAO reserved consideration of this criterion as it was unnecessary for the decision to remand, implying it was not sufficiently met at this stage.
Why This Petition Was Remanded
The AAO withdrew the Director's decision, finding that the Petitioner sufficiently explained the discrepancy regarding his U.S. work plans and demonstrated prospective benefit to the U.S. The AAO also found that the Petitioner met the 'lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards' criterion by submitting certificates from Ethiopian government ministries for 'excellence' in the construction field, which were deemed nationally recognized. The case was remanded for a final merits determination as to whether the Petitioner has sustained national or international acclaim.
Evidence
Evidence Types
Published Material
High Salary
Awards
Evidence Submitted
- Published material about the petitioner
- Commandment of a high salary in his field
- Certificates of appreciation, excellence, and recognition from Ethiopian government ministries (2022, 2023)
- Certificates from a construction contractors association (2022, 2023)
- Letters from Ethiopian ministries indicating awards for excellence
- Professional plan outlining intent to establish a construction company in the U.S. to upgrade infrastructure, create jobs, and generate tax revenue
Similar Cases
Business Manager
Construction · Russia
USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
473 days 2024-08-16
The Director denied the petition because the Petitioner did not explain how submitted materials related to eligibility criteria and failed to submit a timely RFE response to the correct address with the required cover sheet. The RFE response letters from clients did not address eligibility criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal as the Petitioner did not identify any grounds for appeal and the record did not demonstrate eligibility.
Civil Engineer
Construction
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2025-01-27
The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) found that the Director's decision lacked a complete and accurate analysis of the submitted evidence. The Director failed to explain how the evidence was deficient in meeting motion requirements and did not address arguments in the supporting legal brief. Specifically, the Director inaccurately stated that 'no evidence' was submitted in response to the RFE for criteria (ii), (vi), and (viii), despite the Petitioner providing a 14-page statement addressing these. The Director also did not adequately discuss the evidence submitted in support of the motion itself, thereby precluding a meaningful opportunity to appeal.
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.
Project Manager
Engineering · Jordan
USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2024-07-10
The Petitioner failed to meet any of the evaluated EB-1A criteria. The awards were internal employer recognitions, memberships did not require outstanding achievements judged by experts, and there was no evidence of published material about the Petitioner or proof that his original contributions were of major significance in the 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: 2024-11-26.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome remanded
Criteria Met 3 / 3
Evidence Types 3
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