sustained EB-1A Case: Aeronautical Research

ddltbdd* 
prevet3t mtmmted 
invasion olpasonal privacy 
U.S. Department of IIorneland Security 
20 Mass. Ave., N.W., Rm. 3000 
Wash~ngton, DC 20529 
U. S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
PETITION: 
 Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to Section 
203(b)(l)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
This is the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All documents have been returned to 
the office that originally decided your case. Any further inquiry must be made to that office. 
u 
Zbbert P. Wiemann, Chief 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Nebraska Service 
Center, and is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be sustained and 
the petition will be approved. 
The petitioner seeks classification as an employment-based immigrant pursuant to section 203(b)(l)(A) of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 5 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien of extraordinary ability. The 
director determined the petitioner had not established the sustained national or international acclaim necessary to 
qualify for classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. 
On appeal, counsel argues that the petitioner meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
9 204.5(h)(3). 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) hority workers. -- Visas shall first be made available . . . to qualified immigrants who are aliens 
described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): 
(A) Aliens with extraordinary ability. -- An alien is described in this subparagraph if -- 
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or 
athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim 
and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive 
documentation, 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively 
the United States. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) and legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) have 
consistently recognized that Congress intended to set a very high standard for individuals seeking immigrant 
visas as aliens of extraordinary ability. See 56 Fed. Reg. 60897, 60898-99 (Nov. 29, 1991). As used in this 
section, the term "extraordinary ability" means a level of expertise indicating that the individual is one of that 
small percentage who have risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. 8 C.F.R. tj 204.5(h)(2). The specific 
requirements for supporting documents to establish that an alien has sustained national or international 
acclaim and recognition in his or her field of expertise are set forth in the regulation at 8 C.F.R. tj 204.5(h)(3). 
The relevant criteria will be addressed below. It should be reiterated, however, that the petitioner must show 
that he has sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. 
This petition, filed on April 17, 2006, seeks to classifjr the petitioner as an alien with extraordinary ability as 
flow control researcher. At the time of filing, the petitioner was the President of KAYOS Enterprise, Inc. and 
a Research Contractor to the Aeronautical Research Center, United States Air Force Academy. 
The regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) indicates that an alien can establish sustained national or 
international acclaim through evidence of a one-time achievement (that is, a major, internationally recognized 
award). Barring the alien's receipt of a major internationally recognized award, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
204.5(h)(3) outlines ten criteria, at least three of which must be satisfied for an alien to establish the 
sustained acclaim necessary to qualify as an alien of extraordinary ability. We find that the petitioner's 
evidence meets at least three of the regulatory criteria. 
Evidence of the alien 's participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of 
others in the same or an alliedjeld of specification for wlzich classification is sought. 
The petitioner submitted evidence that he chaired a session at the Adaptive Structures and Material Systems 
Symposium of the 2001 American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) International Mechanical 
Engineering Congress and Exposition. The petitioner also chaired a session at the 44"' American Institute of 
Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit in January 2006. The 
petitioner's session chair responsibilities for the latter conference included "identification of Outstanding 
Paper(s) candidates for recognition by the GTTC [Ground Testing Technical Committee]." The petitioner's 
evidence also included documentation that he provided peer review services for multiple engineering 
conferences of the ASME and the AIAA and for publications such as the Journal of Sound and Vibration and 
the AIAA Journal. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major significance in the field. 
The petitioner submitted several letters of support discussing his research contributions. We cite 
representative examples here. 
[The petitioner] designed a system based on the redistribution of load onto various aerodynamic 
control surfaces. In doing so, he demonstrated that the structural efficiency of the wings could be 
increased by about twenty percent. To the lay person this may not seem like an important advance. 
However, a twenty percent increase in structural efficiency translates into the ability for the UAV 
[unmanned air vehicle] to cany much more fuel and a much greater payload. . . . [The petitioner] also 
developed a concept to monitor the vibration of UAV engines, and demonstrated that any time there 
was a problem with the UAV, such as a crack or maintenance issue, the vibration signature would 
change. Thus, by monitoring the vibration of the engines, one can quantitatively "foresee problems," 
and in that way better maintain the UAV's propulsion system, thereby greatly reducing catastrophic 
failures and UAV loss. This innovation has been operation since 2001. 
Page 4 
[The petitioner] devised a new way of placing sensors which sensed the frequency of the flow, give a 
command to activators, which in turn introduce a disturbance into the air, with the result that the 
aerodynamics perform more efficiently and showed that the unsteady forces could be reduced by 
90%. In short, unsteady forces cause undesired energy, which in turn greatly decreases the efficiency 
of the aircraft. The team went on to build an experimental prototype and conducted experiments in 
both wind and water tunnels. This is an absolutely phenomenal breakthrough. 
[The petitioner] has pioneered a breakthrough that has represented an enormous obstacle in 
aeronautics for years. He has successfully designed a model which allows us to predict how the 
unsteady aerodynamics in a wake will respond to a disturbance. With this information, we are now 
poised to design systems to better the performance of future aircraft. 
Professor, Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Illinois Institute of Technology, 
states: 
For the past three years, I have been following [the petitioner's] development of low-order modeling 
techniques for flow control. [The petitioner's] work concerning feedback flow control of a cylinder 
wake is especially important to the scientific community. . . . [The petitioner] has authored and co- 
authored numerous articles on these subjects that have helped engineers and aeronautical scientists to 
effectively deal with feedback control of cylinder wakes. I respect this work very much and even 
cited his work in my own. 
Dr. Rudibert King, Managing Director of the Institute of Process and Plant Technology and Head of the 
Measurement and Control Group at the Technische Universitat Berlin, Germany, states: 
While we do not know each other personally, I greatly respect [the petitioner's] work. 
 His 
discoveries in regard to cylinder wakes and low order modeling techniques are unrivaled by other 
scientists. [The petitioner] has been making amazing contributions to the sciences . . . and he 
continues to revolutionize the way we think about and approach flow and flow control issues. 
Dr. Douglas Barlow, Acting Dean of the Faculty, United States Air Force Academy, states: 
[The petitioner] developed and used closed loop flow control systems as a method of manipulating air 
flow around aircraft to ensure more efficient flight. [The petitioner's] discoveries in reduced order 
methods for closed-loop control systems are unique and represent a major advance in aerodynamics. 
This discovery is of major significance because with the ability to manipulate air around aircraft, not 
only will airplanes and their crews be safer, but also the designs of these planes may be simplified by 
the closed-loop control systems capabilities without sacrificing range, endurance, or payload. 
Dr. Eric Gillies, Senior Lecturer, Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Glasgow, Scotland, 
states: "[The petitioner] developed closed-loop flow control by devising a new way of placing sensors that 
can sense the behavior of the flow and give a command to actuators that introduce a controlled perturbation 
Page 5 
into the flow. This allows for more effective aerodynamics and can reduce unsteady forces that decrease 
deficiency." 
In support of the preceding experts' statements, the petitioner submitted documentation showing dozens of 
independent cites to his published findings. These citations are solid evidence that other researchers have 
been influenced by the petitioner's work and are familiar with it. This unusually large number of citations 
corroborates the experts' statements that the petitioner has made contributions of major significance in his 
field. The record reflects that the petitioner's original scientific contributions are important not only to the 
research institutions where he has worked, but throughout the greater field as well. Leading experts from 
around the world have acknowledged the value of the petitioner's work and its major significance to the flow 
control research field. 
In light of the above, the petitioner has established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's authorship ofscholarly articles in tt'zejield, in professional or rnajor trade 
publications or other rnajor media. 
The petitioner submitted evidence of his authorship of numerous articles in publications such as Journal of 
Sound and Vibration, AIAA Journal, Computers and Fluids, and Journal of Vibration and Control. The 
petitioner also submitted evidence of several of his articles that were presented at AIAA conferences. As 
discussed previously, the record also includes evidence of dozens of articles that cite to his published and 
presented work. These numerous citations demonstrate the significance of the petitioner's articles to his field. 
As such, the petitioner has established that he meets this criterion. 
In this case, the petitioner has satisfied three of the regulatory criteria required for classification as an alien of 
extraordinary ability. Pursuant to the statute and regulations, the petitioner qualifies for classification sought. 
In review, while not all of the petitioner's evidence carries the weight imputed to it by counsel, the totality of 
the evidence establishes an overall pattern of sustained national acclaim and extraordinary ability. The 
petitioner has also established that he seeks to continue working in the same field in the United States and that 
his entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the United States. Therefore, the 
petitioner has overcome the stated grounds for denial and thereby established eligibility for immigrant 
classification under section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act. 
The burden of proof in visa petition proceedings remains entirely with the petitioner. Section 291 of the Act, 
8 U.S.C. 9 1361. The petitioner has sustained that burden. Accordingly, the decision of the director denying 
the petition will be withdrawn and the petition will be approved. 
ORDER: 
 The appeal is sustained and the petition is approved.