Visalytics
Visalytics
dismissed EB-1A

Business Relationship Manager

Nanofluid Engineering · 2024-09-19

Decision Date
2024-09-19
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 (Met)

The Director found the petitioner satisfied this criterion by peer-reviewing 12 papers for scholarly journals between 2007-2015. However, the AAO noted this was a routine process and did not indicate top-tier status or sustained acclaim due to infrequency and cessation after 2015.

Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field (Met)

The Director found the petitioner satisfied this criterion, acknowledging the citation record for the petitioner's two scholarly publications and describing the 2007 publication's record as 'majorly significant'. The AAO, however, found the approximately 2,400 total citations insufficient compared to 'tens of thousands' for top-tier researchers.

Authorship of scholarly articles in the field (Met)

The Director found the petitioner satisfied this criterion by publishing two scholarly papers in 2007 and 2010. The AAO, however, found this insufficient to demonstrate top-tier status or sustained acclaim due to the low number of publications and cessation after 2010.

Why This Petition Was Denied

The appeal was dismissed because the totality of the evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that the Petitioner is among the small percentage at the very top of the field. The Petitioner's 2 scholarly publications (2007, 2010) with approximately 2,400 total citations and peer-review of 12 papers between 2007-2015 were deemed insufficient to show sustained acclaim or top-tier status, especially given the lack of activity since 2015/2010. The AAO found the publication and citation rates, and peer-review frequency, did not compare to those at the very top of the field.

Evidence

Evidence Types
Peer Reviewed Publications
Citations
Judging Experience
Evidence Submitted
  • peer-review of 12 papers for scholarly journals (2007-2015)
  • two scholarly papers published (2007, 2010)
  • approximately 2,400 total citations for publications

Similar Cases

Engineer

Nanotechnology · India

WeGreened EB-1A rfe approved
Oregon 117 days 2025-08-26
The approval was based on 5 peer-reviewed journal articles and 4 first-authored abstracts that garnered 136 citations from scholars in 19 countries. Additionally, the petitioner's 12 peer reviews for top journals and research funding from the Office of Naval Research (ONR) and Army Research Office (ARO) satisfied the EB-1A criteria.
View Case

Others

Materials Science · India

WeGreened EB-1A approved
Kansas 563 days 2026-01-09
The petition was approved based on a strong record of 43 peer-reviewed journal articles, 3 conference articles, and 1,713 citations. The petitioner also demonstrated professional standing through the completion of at least 60 peer reviews for scholarly journals. These metrics satisfied the EB-1A criteria for scholarly articles, original contributions of major significance, and judging the work of others.
View Case

Lecturer

Biotechnology · China

WeGreened EB-1A rfe approved
112 days 2025-04-21
The petition was approved based on 12 peer-reviewed journal articles and a high citation count of 2,446. Additionally, the petitioner completed 30 peer reviews and secured funding from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), satisfying the EB-1A criteria for scholarly articles, judging, and original contributions.
View Case

Software Engineer

Software · China

WeGreened EB-1A approved
Massachusetts 16 days 2025-06-25
The petitioner demonstrated extraordinary ability through 27 peer-reviewed publications in elite journals like Science and Advanced Materials. He amassed 1,550 citations, placing him in the top 1% of cited authors in mechanical engineering. Additionally, he completed 30 peer reviews for prestigious journals such as Photonics Research and Nanophotonics.
View Case

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 Engineering cases

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-09-19.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed
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

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