Law Library

EB1 Case Categories or Issues

Many adjudication descisions cover more than one aspect of an EB1 case where this is the case the case will be listed under each caategory applicable

One Time International Award – 

(i) National Award –

– Determination of Major or Lesser Award – (AAO Decision May 01 2013) – In this case Counsel for Petitioner argued as to whether the consideration of a lesser national or internationally recognized prize or award should be considered within the context of the award being major, since the word major is used in the higher classification in 8 C.F.R section 204.5(h)(3) – “a major, international recognized award”.

– Lesser National or Internartionally Prizes or Awards: Certifications / Company Recognition
AAO Decision December 23, 2011) – In this case the Petitioner gained certification as a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer and also recevied a 10 years of service award.

(ii) Invited Membership – 

– Criterion to Satisy Invited Membership  – (AAO Decision January 7th 2011) – In this case the AAO discussed qualifying memberships and the necessary qualifying criteria.

– The Evidentiary Elements of Membership – (AAO Decision May 01 2013) – In this case the AAO breaks down the elements that need to be evidenced in order to satisfy this category. 

– Membership or Memberships – (AAO Decision December 23, 2011) – In this case the AAO discusses whether one or more instances of membership will satisfy this category.

– Invited Membership: An Evaluation of the Significance of the Membership  – (AAO Decision December 23, 2011) – In this case the AAO explores the levels of membership an organization may have and whether the membership received merits satisfaction of this category. 

(iii) Published Material About You –  

 – Published Material About the Alien Using Google Scholar – (AAO Decision January 7th 2011) In this case, the Petitioner submitted several Internet search results from Google Scholar showing dozens of cites to the beneficiary’s articles. On appeal, the Petitioner also submitted a citation index to the beneficiary’s body of work. 

(iv) Judging 

– Judging as a Peer Reviewer – (AAO Decision December 23rd 2011) – In this case AAO Considered whether judging as a Peer Reveiwer was sufficient satisfy EB1 judging category. 

– Judging a Manucript – (AAO Decision January 7th 2011) – In this case, the beneficiary was asked to review a manuscript for scientific journal and provide a review. The beneficiary also submitted four other requests to review manuscripts during a time period of about 10 years. The petitioner argued that this request to review manuscripts qualified him as judge in his field of endeavor.

– Judging Past or Future Event – (AAO Decision – May 01 2013) – In this case The Petitioner submitted evidence of invitations to judge however submitted no evidence that the judging was in fact completed. 

(v) Innovation – 

 – Volume of Scholarly Articles, Citations by Others and Testimonial Letters – (AAO Decision December 23 2011) – Indian Radioligist and Reasercher with high volume of published articles and citations by others. 

 – Expert Letters and Journal Citations – (AAO Decision January 7th 2011) – The beneficiary submitted expert letters discussing the significance of his original research in the field. Also submitted were citations in scholarly journals outlining his influence in the field.

– First Authored Articles, Co Authored Articles and Expert Letters – (AAO Decision January 4th 2010) – This case confirms and details importance and weight of expert letters, but also discusses issue of artciles where the Petitioner is a co-author as opposed to “First Author”.

(vi) Scholarly Articles – 

 – Professional Publications – (AAO Decision January 7th 2011) – The petitioner submitted documents showing the beneficiary’s authorship of scholarly articles in professional journals.

(vii) Exhibition or Showcases –

  – Restricted to Visual Arts – (AAO Decision January 7th 2011) – The beneficiary submitted evidence of the participation in scientific conferences and seminars.

(viii) Leading / Critical Role – 

– Evidentiary Requirements for Establishing Critical Role – (AAO Decision December 23, 2011). Letters of Support alone should generally not be regarded as being sufficient absent due corroboration.

(ix) High Salary – 

– Evidentiaty Requirements for Establishing High Remuneration – (AAO Decision December 23, 2011) Here, the AAO looks at several factors; the geopgrahic scope of the comparison and secondly that the income must have been established prior to filing.

​(x) Commercial Success –

Check out Google Scholar

Section 204.5 Petitioners for Employment-Based Immigrants

EB1 – AILA Amicus Brief to USCIS on Final Merits Test –
EB1 – Amicus Brief to USCIS on Final Merits  –
EB1 – Amicus Brief to OAA on Incorrect Interpretation of Kazarian  –
EB1 – Amicus Brief to AAO on Final Merits Test  –
EB1 – Amicus Brief to AAO Challenging Interpretation of Kazarian –
Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers

Attorney General and BIA Precedent Decisions – Main Index of Volumes –
BIA – Culturally Unique  – Skirball Cultural Center –
BIA – Drug Conviction  – Multiple Conviction –
BIA – Drug Conviction – Recidivist –

EB1 – Kazarian – Review of EB1 Method of Evaluation –

EB1 – Business Intelligence Analyst – Poorly Documented (Yasar v. DHS Texas) –