remanded EB-1A
Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
New Market Business Strategist · Russia · 2024-08-27
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 metAuthorship of scholarly articles (Met)
The Director found, and the AAO agreed, that the Petitioner successfully submitted evidence of her authorship of scholarly articles in her field.
Participation as a judge of others' work (Met)
The AAO found that the Petitioner demonstrated her participation as a jury member at two conferences, judging work in international law, which is an allied field to her expertise in new market business strategy.
Commandment of a high salary or remuneration (Met)
The AAO found that the Petitioner's 2023 salary of $284,700 as CEO exceeded the average and high salaries for business intelligence analysts in the U.S. and the area where she intends to work, based on new evidence accepted on appeal.
Why This Petition Was Remanded
The Director's decision was withdrawn and the case remanded because the AAO found the Petitioner met three of the ten EB-1A criteria, specifically: authorship of scholarly articles, participation as a judge of others' work in international law (an allied field to new market business strategy), and commanding a high salary relative to others in her field. The Director had initially only found one criterion met. The AAO accepted new evidence on appeal for the high salary criterion, which showed her 2023 salary of $284,700 exceeded the average and high salaries for business intelligence analysts.
Evidence
Evidence Types
Scholarly Articles
Judging Experience
High Salary
Evidence Submitted
- Authorship of scholarly articles in her field
- Participation as a jury member at the International Conference of Young Scientists in 2014
- Participation as a jury member at a 2015 regional university student conference
- 2023 salary of $284,700 as CEO of her legal consulting company
- Wage data showing salary exceeded average and high salaries for business intelligence analysts in the U.S. and the area where she intends to work
Similar Cases
Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
Artificial Intelligence · Chile
USCIS EB-1A remanded
U.S. 2024-12-18
The AAO withdrew the Director's decision because the Petitioner met at least three evidentiary criteria (judging, scholarly articles, and original contributions of major significance), which was sufficient for a final merits determination. However, the petition was remanded because the Petitioner did not establish her intent to continue working in her field in the United States, as required by Section 203(b)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act, an issue not addressed by the Director.
Others
Fintech · China
USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-10-17
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate satisfaction of two additional evidentiary criteria required for EB-1A classification. Specifically, the article submitted to China Banking and Insurance News was deemed not scholarly due to lack of research detail, peer review, or citations. For the high salary criterion, inconsistencies in tax records (5,567,813.42 RMB / $782,060 in 2021 and 7,787,602.62 RMB / $1,093,854 in 2022 vs. online records and employer letter) and lack of clarity on whether salary guides included stock compensation led to the finding that high remuneration was not established. The Petitioner only met one criterion (judging), falling short of the three required.
Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
Others · China
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2024-07-18
The Petitioner met three criteria: leading or critical role, published material in major media, and high salary. The high salary criterion (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(ix)) was satisfied after the AAO determined that salary discrepancies were due to translation errors in tax documents. The Director's original decision was withdrawn because it lacked a final merits determination.
Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
Fintech · Ukraine
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2024-09-24
The AAO found the Director erred in evaluating the membership and published material criteria. The Beneficiary's membership in the Forbes Finance Council was deemed to require outstanding achievements, despite a fee, and several online articles were found to be sufficient published material about the Beneficiary. However, the award received was not established as nationally or internationally recognized, original contributions lacked corroborating evidence of major significance, and articles authored by the Beneficiary were deemed informational rather than scholarly.
Frequently Asked Questions
A remanded EB-1A petition means the case was sent back to the field office for further review. This happens when procedural errors are found or additional evidence should be considered. It is neither an approval nor a denial.
Browse More Cases
Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-08-27.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome remanded
Criteria Met 3 / 3
Evidence Types 3
EB-1A Case Data
Scraped Case Data
Total Cases 883
Success Rate 52.8%
Sustained 466
Dismissed 300
Related Pages
Get Case Insights
Compare your profile against thousands of real petition outcomes. Join the waitlist for personalized analysis.
Join Waitlist