dismissed EB-1A
Others
Others · 2025-01-21
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 metLesser national or international prizes or awards for excellence (Not Met)
The Petitioner asserted eligibility for this criterion in the motion to reopen, but the AAO found no new facts to warrant reopening the prior decision, implying this criterion was not met.
Published material about the alien in professional or major trade publications or other major media (Not Met)
The Petitioner asserted eligibility for this criterion in the motion to reopen, but the AAO found no new facts to warrant reopening the prior decision, implying this criterion was not met.
Original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in the field (Not Met)
The Petitioner asserted eligibility for this criterion in the motion to reopen, but the AAO found no new facts to warrant reopening the prior decision, implying this criterion was not met.
Performance of a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation (Not Met)
The Petitioner asserted eligibility for this criterion in the motion to reopen, but the AAO found no new facts to warrant reopening the prior decision, implying this criterion was not met.
Why This Petition Was Denied
The motion to reopen was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to provide new facts or evidence that would establish an error in the prior decision to dismiss the appeal and combined motion. The Petitioner asserted eligibility for a lesser national or international prize, published material, contributions of major significance, and a leading or critical role, but these claims were not supported by new facts relevant to reopening the prior decision, thus the underlying petition remains denied.
Similar Cases
Unknown Position
Unknown Industry
USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2025-01-02
The motion to reopen was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to present 'new facts' supported by documentary evidence, as required by 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2). The Petitioner reasserted previously stated facts and resubmitted previously provided evidence, which does not constitute new facts. Additionally, new eligibility claims cannot be introduced for the first time in a motion to reopen following an adverse appeal decision. The Petitioner's claims regarding inability to obtain supporting documentation for memberships and additional assertions for contributions of major significance and leading role criteria were deemed insufficient or unsupported by evidence.
Lawyer
Legal Services
USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2025-01-10
The appeal was dismissed because the Petitioner's brief only addressed the original petition denial and her eligibility, rather than challenging the Director's most recent decision to dismiss her combined motion to reopen and reconsider. The AAO found that the Petitioner's failure to address why the Director's motion dismissal contained any erroneous conclusion of law or statement of fact was a sufficient basis for summary dismissal, and by not contesting the motion decision, she abandoned those claims.
Unknown Position
Unknown Industry
USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2025-01-30
The motion to reopen was dismissed due to a lack of new facts or documentary evidence. The motion to reconsider was dismissed because the Petitioner failed to demonstrate that the prior decision was based on an incorrect application of law or policy. Specifically, the AAO found its reliance on Krasniqi v. Dibbins for merit-based awards was correct, the petitioner's awards were for participation, not excellence. The petitioner also failed to show error in the analysis of the leading or critical role criterion, or the high salary criterion, as no comparative evidence was provided to show the salary was high in relation to others in the field.
Others
Others
USCIS EB-1A dismissed
2025-03-13
The combined motion to reopen and reconsider was dismissed because the Petitioner did not provide new facts or establish that the previous dismissal was based on an incorrect application of law or policy. Specifically, the Petitioner sent his appeal brief to the wrong location, violating 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2) and Form I-290B instructions. The Petitioner's resubmission of previously provided information did not meet the requirements for a motion to reopen.
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
Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2025-01-21.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome dismissed
Criteria Met 0 / 3
EB-1A Case Data
Scraped Case Data
Total Cases 881
Success Rate 52.9%
Sustained 466
Dismissed 299
Related Pages
Get Case Insights
Compare your profile against thousands of real petition outcomes. Join the waitlist for personalized analysis.
Join Waitlist