Visalytics
Visalytics
dismissed EB-1A RFE Issued

Product Design Director

Software Application Development · 2024-10-31

Decision Date
2024-10-31
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
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards (Not Met)

The Petitioner failed to demonstrate that being 'featured' by Apple constitutes a recognized award or that the claimed Bronze and Gold awards were received by the Beneficiary or were significant in the field, lacking corroborating evidence from presenting organizations.

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

The submitted articles discussed apps the Beneficiary worked on but were not 'about the alien' as required. Additionally, the Petitioner did not provide author attribution, publication information, or evidence of the publications' major media status.

Participation as a judge of the work of others (Not Met)

Letters from colleagues stating the Beneficiary vetted and screened job candidates for design roles were deemed insufficient, lacking specific details (who, when, what work judged) and failing to establish that this activity constitutes judging consistent with the regulatory criterion.

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

Recommendation letters and analytics data did not sufficiently demonstrate the originality or major significance of the Beneficiary's product design work beyond his employers/clients, failing to show widespread influence in the field.

Authorship of scholarly articles in the field (Not Met)

The submitted slides and photographic images of speaking engagements were not considered 'scholarly articles' as defined by USCIS. The Petitioner also failed to show the work was published in professional or major trade publications or other major media.

High salary or other significantly high remuneration (Not Met)

The Petitioner provided the Beneficiary's salary and W-2 but failed to offer comparable salary evidence for 'Director of Product Design' roles, instead submitting data for 'Web and Digital Interface Designers,' which was deemed an inappropriate comparison for a managerial position.

Why This Petition Was Denied

The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate the Beneficiary met at least three of the ten EB-1A criteria. Specifically, the awards were not corroborated or shown to be nationally/internationally recognized. Published material was not 'about the alien' and lacked publication details. Judging experience was vague and lacked specific details or corroborating evidence. Original contributions lacked evidence of major significance beyond employers/clients. Authorship of scholarly articles was not met, as slides/photos of speaking engagements are not scholarly articles. High salary was not established with comparable data for 'Product Design Director' roles, only for 'Web and Digital Interface Designers'.

Request for Evidence (RFE)

Unsuccessfully Addressed

The RFE requested further evidence for the awards criterion, to which the Petitioner responded with a letter from P-E-. The Director also raised concerns about the published material lacking URLs and specific publication details. For the judging criterion, the RFE sought more specific and detailed information regarding the Beneficiary's participation. For the high salary criterion, the RFE implicitly requested comparable salary data relevant to the Beneficiary's specific job title, which the Petitioner failed to provide adequately.

RFE Targets
Lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awardsPublished material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major mediaParticipation as a judge of the work of othersHigh salary or other significantly high remuneration

Evidence

Evidence Types
Awards
Media Coverage
Reference Letters Dependent
Original Contributions
Judging Experience
Scholarly Articles
Conference Presentations
High Salary
Evidence Submitted
  • screenshot of Flight app with Apple logos ('Featured on App Store', 'Featured on [Apple event]')
  • letter from P-E-, Director of [Company] stating app received Bronze at [Award] for Best Mobile Apps and Gold at [Award] for Mobile App Awards
  • two pages from [Company] blog listing 17 awards received by [Company]
  • articles entitled 'app for iPhone', '[AppAdvice]', and '[MacWorld]' discussing various apps
  • letter from O-C-, co-founder of [Company], stating Beneficiary vetted and hired designers
  • letter from B-Y-, General Manager of Consumer Marketing at [Telecommunications Company], stating Beneficiary consulted on hiring for critical design roles
  • second letter from B-Y- asserting Beneficiary assisted with technical evaluations and creative insights for hiring
  • recommendation letters discussing Beneficiary's product design work for Petitioner, [Company], and [Company]
  • analytics data for [App] apps
  • information about [Company] and a share buyback agreement Beneficiary executed
  • letter from B-Y-, former group sales and marketing director, asserting Beneficiary led design of Online Services App, Phone Operating System Interface Redesign, Streaming Service, and Music App
  • statement from S-A-, Petitioner's CEO and cofounder, regarding Beneficiary's contribution to [App] application design
  • statement from V-B-, founder and CEO of [Company], regarding Beneficiary's design work for [Company]
  • statement from B-A-, product manager at [Company], regarding Beneficiary's design work for movie and music streaming apps in Turkey
  • slides and photographic images of Beneficiary's speaking engagements
  • March 2022 job offer letter for Director of Product Design with $180,000 salary
  • Beneficiary's Form W-2 showing $181,276 earned in 2023
  • February 2023 Foreign Labor Certification Wage Results for 'Web and Digital Interface Designers' in New York
  • May 2021 'National estimates for Web and Digital Interface Designers' from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Similar Cases

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.

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.

Business Development Manager

Telecommunications

USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2024-09-12
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to satisfy at least three of the ten evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. Specifically, the Petitioner only met the 'judging' criterion. The 'original contributions of major significance' criterion was not met as the Petitioner's product development work, guest lecture, book, and financial work were not shown to have had substantial influence beyond his employers or clients, nor were they considered to be of major significance in the field. The 'scholarly articles' criterion was not met because the submitted book was not considered a scholarly article and was not shown to be published in a professional or major trade publication or other major media for learned persons. The AAO also noted that the Petitioner did not demonstrate national or international acclaim or that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field.

Chief Technology Officer (CTO)

Software · South Korea

USCIS EB-1A rfe sustained
2024-12-09
The AAO sustained the appeal, finding the Petitioner met the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. The decision highlighted the Petitioner's numerous patents, the significant commercial success of his led products (holding over 20% global market share and a $2 billion acquisition), and objective third-party media coverage that featured him as the 'face' of popular products in digital dentistry. These factors collectively demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim and that he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field, satisfying the EB-1A criteria.

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 Software cases

Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2024-10-31.

Browse all cases

At a Glance

Outcome dismissed
RFE Issued
Criteria Met 0 / 3
Evidence Types 8

EB-1A Case Data

Scraped Case Data

Total Cases 919
Success Rate 53.0%
Sustained 487
Dismissed 315

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