dismissed EB-1A
Data Analytics Leader, Associate Vice President, Head Of Analytics And Data Science, Sr. Business Intelligence Engineer
Data Analytics Leader, Data Analytics Field, Data Visualization Field, Data Science Field · 2025-01-29
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 metParticipation as a judge of the work of others (Met)
The Petitioner demonstrated participation as a judge for the 2023 O Awards and the 2023 Competition, satisfying this criterion.
Served in a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation (Met)
The Petitioner demonstrated serving in a leading or critical role for a distinguished consumer technology company since 2017, satisfying this criterion.
Authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media (Met)
The Petitioner authored at least one scholarly article, 'I I', published by Towards Data Science in 2023, satisfying this criterion.
Membership in associations in the field which require outstanding achievements of their members (Not Met)
While the Petitioner gained senior membership in IEEE (Feb 2023), fellow membership in BCS (June 2023), and fellowship in IET (Nov 2023), the AAO did not find sufficient evidence that these memberships themselves are indicative of sustained national or international acclaim or place the individual at the very top of the field.
High salary or other significantly high remuneration for services (Not Met)
Evidence related to the Petitioner's salary was considered but deemed insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.
Why This Petition Was Denied
The motions to reopen and reconsider were dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim. Although three criteria were met (judging, leading/critical role, scholarly articles), the evidence for these achievements (judging activities, articles, and senior/fellow memberships in professional associations) was predominantly from 2023. The AAO found insufficient evidence that the Petitioner's contributions to their employer since 2017 garnered external recognition or that their selection as a judge for various competitions was based on sustained acclaim. New evidence, including career progression letters and online comments, was deemed insufficient to establish sustained acclaim or placement at the very top of the field.
Evidence
Evidence Types
Judging Experience
Leading Role
Scholarly Articles
Professional Memberships
Reference Letters Dependent
Conference Presentations
Awards
Evidence Submitted
- Participation as a judge of the work of others in his field (2023)
- Served in a leading or critical role for an organization with a distinguished reputation (since 2017, specifically Associate Vice President, Head of Analytics and Data Science since 2021)
- Authored at least one scholarly article in a qualifying publication (2023, 'I I' published by Towards Data Science)
- Senior membership in IEEE (February 2023)
- Fellow membership in British Computer Society (BCS) (June 2023)
- Fellowship in the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) (November 2023)
- Increment and promotion letters from I I (2018, 2019)
- Offer letter from I I for Sr. Business Intelligence Engineer (February 2021)
- Screenshots of seven online comments on his article 'I I'
- LinkedIn comment requesting guidance from a competition participant
- Participation as a faculty speaker at the I I (2023)
- Invitations from The I I to participate in a posted to LinkedIn (2023)
- Participation as a discussion leader for I I monthly roundtable discussions (2023)
- Invitation to appear as a guest on the I I podcast (2023)
Similar Cases
Operations Manager
Information Technology
USCIS EB-1A remanded
2024-09-19
The Director initially found only one criterion met (judging). The AAO found the Petitioner met the judging criterion (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv)). For the leading or critical role criterion (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(viii)), the AAO found evidence of leadership on a sales team offering effort, managing a $50 million portfolio, leading a $97 million online learning expansion project, serving as a technical leader for data movement to the cloud, and leading critical data migration with significant cost savings. For the high salary criterion (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix)), the AAO noted the Petitioner's 2022 earnings of approximately $254,000, restricted stock units valued at $33,152 (2021) and $75,599 (2023), and O*NET wage information, which demonstrated a significantly high remuneration compared to others in the field.
Data Analyst
Information Technology
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2024-06-11
The matter was remanded because the Director's decision did not fully explain the reasons for denial or consider the evidence submitted for the specific criteria of awards, memberships, and leading roles. The original decision also erroneously discussed factors pertinent to a separate classification (National Interest Waiver) instead of the requested EB-1A classification.
Data Scientist
Information Technology
USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-08-20
The appeal was dismissed because, despite the Petitioner satisfying three initial criteria (judging, scholarly articles, and leading role), the evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim. The activities cited, such as judging, authoring articles, and holding a leading role, were primarily limited to a short period (2021-2023, mostly 2023) immediately preceding the petition filing in 2023, failing to show a 'career of acclaimed work.' Additionally, memberships in BCS and IEEE were not deemed to require outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts, and the high salary claim lacked comparison to top-level peers with similar experience and responsibilities.
Data Scientist
Information Technology
USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2024-08-26
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to establish eligibility for extraordinary ability. While the Director found two criteria met (scholarly articles and judging), the AAO found the Petitioner did not meet the criterion for published material about her due to insufficient evidence of the medium's major status, nor the criterion for original contributions of major significance, as citation counts (one paper cited only twice) and reference letters lacked sufficient detail to prove major impact in the field of data science. The Petitioner did not meet the minimum three criteria required, thus failing the initial evidence requirements.
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: 2025-01-29.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome dismissed
Criteria Met 3 / 3
Evidence Types 7
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