remanded EB-1A
Civil Engineer
Structural Fire Engineering · China · 2024-10-01
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 metParticipation as a judge of the work of others (Met)
The Director and AAO agreed that the Petitioner met this criterion by demonstrating participation as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field.
Authorship of scholarly articles (Met)
The Director and AAO agreed that the Petitioner met this criterion through authorship of scholarly articles in a major trade publication.
Original scientific, scholarly, or artistic contributions of major significance (Met)
The AAO concluded that the Petitioner met this criterion through published research, being a primary drafter of regional and national standards incorporating his findings, and contributions as an inventor to over 20 patents in China and one in the U.S.
Why This Petition Was Remanded
The Director's decision was withdrawn because the AAO found the Petitioner met three criteria: judging the work of others (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv)), authorship of scholarly articles (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi)), and original contributions of major significance (8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v)). Evidence included scholarly articles, co-authored books, being a 'main author' and 'main drafter' of engineering standards/codes, and over 20 patents in China and one in the U.S. The Petitioner also won a national industry first-prize Science and Technology award and two second-prize Science & Technology Progress Awards. The matter was remanded for a final merits determination, as the Director had not reached a finding on whether the totality of evidence demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim.
Evidence
Evidence Types
Peer Reviewed Publications
Patents
Awards
Judging Experience
Original Contributions
Evidence Submitted
- doctoral degree in structural engineering
- published scholarly articles discussing research findings concerning properties of fire-resistant structural steel and aluminum alloy materials at varied temperatures
- co-authored a book on fire resistance of steel structures
- listed as a 'main author' in a publication pertaining to engineering construction standard
- a 'main drafter' of two other publications (one pertaining to engineering construction code and another pertaining to China's national code for fire safety of steel structures in buildings)
- over 20 approved patents in China
- one patent granted in the United States
- participation as a judge of the work of others
Similar Cases
Civil Engineer
Engineering · Peru
USCIS EB-1A remanded
2024-09-10
The Director denied the petition because the Petitioner only demonstrated meeting two of the required three criteria (judging and scholarly articles). The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) reversed the Director's finding on the awards criterion, concluding that the Petitioner did receive a nationally recognized award (the medal from the National Council of the _________ in 2022 for outstanding professional work in engineering in Peru). With three criteria now met (awards, judging, and scholarly articles), the AAO withdrew the Director's decision and remanded the case for a final merits determination, as the Director had not reached this stage of evaluation.
Scientist
Engineering · China
WeGreened EB-1A approved
New York 17 days 2025-09-04
The petition was approved based on a strong record of 11 journal articles and 19 conference papers with over 200 citations, placing the applicant in the top 4% of the field. The applicant also demonstrated expertise through 30 peer reviews and research funding from the National Science Foundation and Department of Energy. These metrics satisfied the EB-1A criteria for scholarly articles, original contributions, and judging roles.
Civil Engineer
Construction
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2025-01-27
The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) found that the Director's decision lacked a complete and accurate analysis of the submitted evidence. The Director failed to explain how the evidence was deficient in meeting motion requirements and did not address arguments in the supporting legal brief. Specifically, the Director inaccurately stated that 'no evidence' was submitted in response to the RFE for criteria (ii), (vi), and (viii), despite the Petitioner providing a 14-page statement addressing these. The Director also did not adequately discuss the evidence submitted in support of the motion itself, thereby precluding a meaningful opportunity to appeal.
Civil Engineer
Engineering · China
WeGreened EB-1A approved
17 days 2023-05-19
The petition was approved based on 11 peer-reviewed scientific articles in authoritative journals and a significant citation record of 189 citations. Additionally, the petitioner demonstrated his expertise through 30 completed peer reviews for high-standard academic journals. His work's impact on U.S. infrastructure and support from federal agencies like DOE and FEMA further justified the extraordinary ability classification.
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: 2024-10-01.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome remanded
Criteria Met 3 / 3
Evidence Types 5
EB-1A Case Data
Scraped Case Data
Total Cases 919
Success Rate 53.0%
Sustained 487
Dismissed 315
Related Pages
Get Case Insights
Compare your profile against thousands of real petition outcomes. Join the waitlist for personalized analysis.
Join Waitlist