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.

How does the human-computer interactive digital technologies industry affect EB-1A petition outcomes?

The human-computer interactive digital technologies 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.

dismissed EB-1A

Information Technology Project Manager

Human-Computer Interactive Digital Technologies · 2024-10-24

Decision Date

2024-10-24

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 met

Authorship of scholarly articles (Met)

The Director determined the Petitioner met this criterion based on two papers published in ACM Journals and a patent application. The AAO considered this evidence in the final merits determination but found it insufficient to demonstrate top-tier status without comparative data.

Performance of a leading or critical role for organizations with a distinguished reputation (Met)

The Director determined the Petitioner met this criterion based on her critical roles in three organizations, including launching services and managing product teams. The AAO acknowledged these accomplishments but found insufficient evidence of national or international acclaim resulting from these roles.

High salary or other significantly high remuneration for services (Met)

The Director determined the Petitioner met this criterion based on her annual salary of $200,000. The AAO agreed it met the criterion but found the comparative evidence insufficient to establish that her earnings reflected being among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

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

The Petitioner claimed to meet this criterion with two articles about her in TechTimes.com and Outlookindia.com, and three articles where she was a speaker or quoted. The AAO found the evidence insufficient to prove these were major media and that the articles were not 'about' her work or did not reflect sustained national or international acclaim.

Original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field (Not Met)

The Petitioner claimed to meet this criterion, referencing her patent and expert letters. The AAO acknowledged the expert support for her contributions but found insufficient evidence that she received widespread acclaim from the field for this work, failing to demonstrate major significance.

Why This Petition Was Denied

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that she is among the small percentage at the very top of her field. Although she published two papers (cited 47 times) and filed a patent application, the record lacked evidence differentiating her publication rate from others at the top of the field or showing widespread acclaim for her leading roles. Her high salary was noted but not sufficiently compared to the upper echelon of the field to indicate top-tier status. Media articles were deemed non-qualifying or insufficient to show acclaim, and expert letters, while supportive, lacked corroborating evidence of widespread recognition.

Evidence

Evidence Types

Peer Reviewed Publications

Citations

Patents

Awards

Media Coverage

Reference Letters Dependent

Reference Letters Independent

Leading Role

High Salary

Evidence Submitted

two papers published in Association for Computer Machinery (ACM) Journals in 2012
patent application filed in 2016, published in U.S. Patent Application Publication in 2018
papers downloaded over 800 times
papers and patent application cited 47 times since 2018
keynote speech at a conference in Denmark in 2012
keynote speech at a conference in Texas in 2012
leading role in launching free and attorney-assisted LLC formation services in 10 states
critical role in conceptualizing an Android app for a clinical product
critical role managing product and user experience teams across several business units, overseeing a portfolio of 20 products and services
annual salary of $200,000
two articles about her work in legal and healthcare technologies published in TechTimes.com and Outlookindia.com
letters from former colleagues and experts

Similar Cases

General Manager

Printing and Publishing · China

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed

2023-11-28

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner only met two criteria: scholarly articles and published material. The 'original contributions' criterion was not met as patents alone do not prove major significance without evidence of widespread industry adoption. The 'high remuneration' criterion failed because the Petitioner's total compensation (salary plus bonuses) was compared against industry averages of base salary only, preventing a valid comparison. Additionally, the 'leading or critical role' and 'membership' criteria were not satisfied due to lack of evidence regarding the organizations' distinguished reputations and the nature of the Petitioner's individual membership.

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.

Director

Software

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed

California 2024-10-24

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate the Beneficiary met at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. Specifically, claims for memberships, published material, original contributions of major significance, and high salary were not substantiated with objective, independent evidence. The evidence provided for memberships lacked proof of outstanding achievement requirements, published material lacked major media standing, original contributions were limited to company projects rather than the overall field, and salary comparisons were not against similarly employed workers in the field. The decision explicitly states that the Beneficiary did not establish the acclaim and recognition required for the classification, failing to show he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field.

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.

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 Information Technology cases

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-10-24.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed

Criteria Met 3 / 3

Evidence Types 9

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