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 international supply chain specialist industry affect EB-1A petition outcomes?

The international supply chain specialist 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 RFE Issued

International Supply Chain Specialist

International Supply Chain Specialist · 2025-02-13

Decision Date

2025-02-13

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 Petitioner offered material relating to her and her work, including two notable articles. However, the remaining pieces were not specifically about her, and the coverage was deemed insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.

Participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of endeavor (Not Met)

The Petitioner served as a judge for the 2023 I I Awards, but the evidence did not demonstrate how this role represented an individual at the very top of the field, lacking details on the level of candidates judged or consistent history of reviewing acclaimed individuals.

Authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media (Not Met)

The Petitioner presented articles she wrote during her school years and in 2023. While some 2023 articles were from publications with higher circulations, their small number and other deficiencies in the record were not adequate to establish eligibility.

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

Letters from clients detailed work that assisted their companies but did not adequately explain how it constituted major significance to the supply chain management field. An online course was found useful by clients but lacked ample information on its widespread adoption or major significance.

High salary or other significantly high remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field (Not Met)

A proposed salary was presented, but no evidence of actual salary received. Average wage statistics for logisticians and top executives were deemed not comparable to the Petitioner's role. Company ownership (98.15%) was shown, but no information was supplied to establish that this equity holding was high in relation to the field.

Why This Petition Was Denied

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.

Request for Evidence (RFE)

Unsuccessfully Addressed

The RFE requested additional evidence, and the Petitioner submitted documentation such as a 2023 Award, a book, 2023 bank records, and average salary data for supply chain experts. However, these pieces of evidence originated after the petition's filing date, making them ineligible for consideration.

RFE Targets

awardsAuthorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major mediaHigh salary or other significantly high remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field

Evidence

Evidence Types

Media Coverage

Judging Experience

Scholarly Articles

Reference Letters Dependent

Original Contributions

High Salary

Reference Letters Independent

Evidence Submitted

press coverage (two notable articles about her)
judging for the 2023 I I Awards
authored professional articles
letters from clients
letters from a former coworker
letters from a former professor
online course
participation at a conference on importing and exporting
company ownership (98.15% of I I)
expert opinion from Dr. I I
expert opinion from an associate professor

Similar Cases

Business Manager

Consulting

USCIS EB-1A dismissed

2025-02-26

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.

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.

Director

Media · China

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed

California 2024-09-16

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to meet the initial evidentiary requirements, establishing only one of the ten criteria (leading or critical role) instead of the required three. Specific criteria like awards, memberships, published material, judging, original contributions, scholarly articles, exhibitions, and high salary were not met due to issues such as awards given to the employer, job duties not qualifying as judging, lack of full English translations for articles, contributions not proven to be of major significance, and insufficient comparative wage data for the high salary claim. The AAO concluded the record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner was among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

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.

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 Logistics cases

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2025-02-13.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed

RFE Issued

Criteria Met 0 / 3

Evidence Types 7

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