Visalytics
Visalytics
dismissed EB-1A RFE Issued

Managing Partner

Legal Field · Brazil · 2024-12-06

Decision Date
2024-12-06
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
Participation as a judge of the work of others (Not Met)

The Petitioner's service as a reviewer on a panel judging Ph.D. theses (five instances from 2003-2010) was not deemed commensurate with sustained national or international acclaim or a level placing him at the very top of the field, lacking evidence of wide attention or recognition outside his alma mater.

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

The Petitioner's media coverage (two Valor articles without author, Bloombergnews.com, Washington Post) was found to be limited, often not about him or his specific work, and insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or a career of acclaimed work.

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

The Petitioner authored two law books and a law book chapter (1995-2005), but failed to provide corroborating evidence (e.g., citation history) to show widespread use, significant impact, or that this publication record reflects sustained national or international acclaim or a position at the very top of his field, especially given the last publication was in 2005.

Performance of a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation (Not Met)

While the Petitioner served as a managing partner since 1989 and held other appointments, the evidence (including letters of support and firm awards) did not sufficiently demonstrate how his specific roles or contributions garnered national or international acclaim or placed him among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

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

The Petitioner's original contributions, such as successfully arguing a case before the Supreme Court in Brazil, lacked sufficient detailed information and corroborating evidence to show unusual influence or high impact on the overall field, beyond general summaries in recommendation letters.

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

The Petitioner's 2015 compensation of R$10,713,428 was not adequately compared to that of other managing partners in his field. The provided 2020 salary data for attorneys was not contemporaneous, reliable, or comparable to his specific managerial position, thus failing to establish significantly high remuneration.

Why This Petition Was Denied

The motion to reconsider was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field. His judging experience (five Ph.D. thesis reviews) was not deemed indicative of national acclaim. His authorship of two law books and one chapter (1995-2005) lacked corroborating evidence of widespread citation or impact. While he held a leading role as a managing partner, the evidence did not show this role garnered national acclaim. His original contributions, such as arguing a case that declared a law unconstitutional in Brazil, lacked sufficient detail and corroborating evidence of major significance beyond solicited letters. Media coverage was limited and often not about him or his specific work. His reported compensation of R$10,713,428 in 2015 was not adequately compared to other managing partners in his field, and the provided salary data for attorneys was not contemporaneous or reliable for comparison.

Request for Evidence (RFE)

Unsuccessfully Addressed

The RFE requested objective documentary evidence to corroborate the importance and impact of the Petitioner's publications and original contributions, such as evidence of widespread public commentary or citations. The Petitioner responded with a letter asserting major recognition, but failed to provide sufficient corroborating evidence like citation records.

RFE Targets
Original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the fieldAuthorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications or other major media

Evidence

Evidence Types
Judging Experience
Peer Reviewed Publications
Reference Letters Dependent
Media Coverage
High Salary
Original Contributions
Evidence Submitted
  • participation as a judge of Ph.D. theses (five instances from 2003 until 2010)
  • authorship of two law books and a law book chapter (between 1995 and 2005)
  • position as a managing partner for a law firm since 1989
  • successful argument of a case before the Supreme Court in 2013 resulting in a law being declared unconstitutional
  • letters of support from several individuals, including Justice I and Mr. I
  • media articles in Valor, Bloombergnews.com, and Washington Post
  • total compensation of R$10,713,428 in 2015

Similar Cases

Lawyer

Legal Services · Brazil

USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-07-30
The Petitioner failed the final merits determination because his judging experience (Ph.D. theses and tax judge) and scholarly articles (two books and a chapter, last in 2005) lacked evidence of widespread influence or sustained acclaim. His leading role at his law firm and high remuneration (R$10.7 million in 2015) were not sufficiently corroborated as being at the very top of the field compared to peers. Awards from Corporate INTL and Analise Advocacia 500 were not proven to be nationally or internationally recognized for excellence.

Director

Consulting

USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-10-30
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate the Beneficiary's sustained national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field. Although the Beneficiary met three initial criteria (judging, scholarly articles, leading/critical role), the evidence lacked sufficient significance. Specifically, his judging experience (one committee, one book review) and single authored article (76 citations) were not shown to be widely recognized or impactful compared to top professionals. Recommendation letters and salary were also deemed insufficient to establish widespread acclaim.

Lawyer

Legal Services · Egypt

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2025-01-08
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to satisfy at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. Specifically, membership in the Egyptian Bar Association was deemed mandatory for practicing lawyers, not indicative of outstanding achievement. The Petitioner also failed to identify any distinguished organization for which he held a leading or critical role, and his claims of high remuneration were not supported by comparative evidence. The AAO found that the submitted evidence, including client letters, did not demonstrate the required sustained national or international acclaim.

Lawyer

Legal Services

USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2025-02-05
The appeal is dismissed because the Petitioner failed to satisfy at least three of the alternate regulatory criteria for extraordinary ability. Specifically, the Petitioner did not demonstrate receipt of nationally or internationally recognized awards, membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements, publications about her in major media (due to lack of certified translations and independent evidence), original contributions of major significance, a leading or critical role for distinguished organizations, or high remuneration for services (due to insufficient corroborating evidence). The Petitioner also abandoned claims for display of work and commercial successes.

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 Legal Services cases More cases from Brazil

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-12-06.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed
RFE Issued
Criteria Met 3 / 3
Evidence Types 6

EB-1A Case Data

Scraped Case Data

Total Cases 881
Success Rate 52.9%
Sustained 466
Dismissed 299

Related Pages

EB-1A Overview EB-1A in Brazil 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