sustained EB-1A Case: Biology

MATTER OF 1-Z-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: FEB. 13,2018 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, a researcher, seeks classification as an individual of extraordinary ability in the 
sciences. See Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)( I )(A), 8 U.S.C. § 
1153(b )(1 )(A). This first preference classification makes immigrant visas available to those who can 
demonstrate their extraordinary ability through sustained national or intemational acclaim and whose 
achievements have been recognized in their field through extensive documentation. 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien 
Worker, concluding that the Petitioner had satisfied only two of the initial evidentiary criteria, of 
which she must meet at least three. On appeaL the Petitioner submits additional evidence and 
contends that she has demonstrated eligibility for this classification. 
Upon de novo review, we will sustain the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act states: 
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 intemational 
acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the tield through 
extensive documentation. 
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work m the area of 
extraordinary ability, and 
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the 
United States. 
The term "extraordinary ability" refers only to those individuals in "that small percentage who have 
risen to the very top of the field of endeavor." 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2). The implementing regulation at 
.
Matter (~f.J-Z-
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth two options for satisfying this classification's initial evidence 
requirements. First, a petitioner can demonstrate a one-time achievement (that is a major. 
internationally recognized award). Alternately, he or she must provide evidence that meets at least three 
of the criteria listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) (including items such as awards, published material 
in certain media, and scholarly articles). 
Where a petitioner meets these initial evidence requirements, we then consider the totality of the 
material provided in a final merits determination and assess whether the record shows sustained 
national or international acclaim and demonstrates that the individual is among the small percentage 
at the very top of the field of endeavor. See Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d I I 15 (9th Cir. 2010) 
(discussing a two-part review where the documentation is first counted and then, if fulfilling the 
required number of criteria, considered in the context of a final merits determination): see also 
Visinscaia v. Beers , 4 F. Supp. 3d 126, 131-32 (D.D.C. 2013); R[ial v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 
(W.D. Wash. 2011 ). This two-step analysis is consistent with our holding that the "truth is to be 
determined not by the quantity of evidence alone but by its quality:· as well as the principle that we 
examine "each piece of evidence for relevance , probative value, and credibility , both individually 
and within the context of the totality of the evidence, to determine whether the fact to be proven is 
probably true." Matter o{Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 201 0). 
II. ANALYSIS 
At the time of filing, the Petitioner was a researcher at the 
studying the origins, behavior, diseases , genetics, and life processes of insects and spiders. As she 
has not established that she has received a major, internationally recognized award, she must satisfy 
at least three of the alternate regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
The Director found that the Petitioner met the judging criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3 )(iv) and the 
authorship of scholarly articles criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3 )(vi). The record supports these 
findings, as it includes evidence that she has reviewed numerous manuscripts for journals such as the 
and and that she has authored dozens 
of scholarly articles in her tiel d. 
On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that she also meets the contributions of major significance 
criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3 ). As discussed further below, we agree that the record adequately 
documents the major significance of her contributions to the field. Accordingly, the Petitioner has 
met the plain language requirements of three criteria. Furthermore, in a final merits analysis, we 
find that she has demonstrated achievements indicating she is among the small percentage at the 
very top of the field of endeavor. 
2 
.
Matter of J-Z-
B. Final Merits Determination 
In a final merits determination, we examine the material in a collective nature to determine if the 
individual has demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a petitioner has sustained national 
or international acclaim , and achievements recognized in the field through extensive documentation. 
Here. the Petitioner has offered sufficient evidence to show that she meets that standard. 
We first evaluate the significance of the Petitioner's judging experience to determine if such 
evidence is indicative of her extraordinary ability as required tor this highly restrictive classification. 
See Kazarian, 596 F. 3d at 1121-22. Here, the record indicates that she has received and completed 
independent requests to review a substantial number of manuscripts for multiple professional 
publications. In addition, she was selected as an expert reviewer for a research proposal seeking 
federal funding from the We find this experience, together with the 
achievements described below, to be consistent 
with a determination that the Petitioner is among 
the 
small percentage at the top of his field of endeavor. 5;ee 8 C.F.R. ~ 204.5(h)(2). 
Next, the Petitioner has provided evidence of her authorship of a considerable amount of published 
material relating to her studies on phylogeny, systematics, and biodiversity. Specifically, the record 
reflects that she has written 43 scholarly articles and co-authored five book chapters, in addition to 
presenting her research findings at several conferences. As authoring scholarly articles is inherent to 
scientists and researchers, the citation history or other evidence of the influence of the Petitioner's 
written work is an important indicator of the impact that her work has had on the field the 
recognition it has received. In this case, the Petitioner has offered evidence that her articles had 
garnered over 300 citations at the time of filing the petition, and she provided documentation 
showing that her citation history is very high for her specialized area of study. In addition, even 
after filing, her work continues to be cited at a high level, with her work now having received well 
over 500 citations. 1 
Beyond presenting citation evidence, the Petitioner has clearly identified her contributions to the 
field and has otherwise documented their significance. The record reflects that she discovered 200 
new species of insects and revised the taxonomy of 160 spiders. She also described 96 new species 
of jumping spiders which represent 10% of the overall documented information regarding certain 
spider families. In another project, the Petitioner collected and reported on 111 species of long­
jawed spiders from China, including 41 newly discovered species and two new subfamilies. In 
addition, as evidence of her work's importance and the acclaim she has garnered, the record 
indicates that two researchers with no personal connection to the Petitioner have named new species 
of spiders after her due to her contributions to the field and her in1luence on their work. 
The importance and recognition of the Petitioner's research is further evidenced through several 
recommendation letters applauding her work and her influence upon the field of phylogenetics, 
1 
See https: /, 
and incorporated into the record). 
(last visited February 7, 2018, 
.
lvfatter of.J-Z-
systematics, and the biodiversity discovery of spiders. For example, professor at 
stated that she applied "modern molecular phylogenetic approaches into 
systematic studies of an interesting jumping spider lineage ," and this "phylogenetic framework 
provides a solid foundation for almost all future studies on evolution, as well as biodiversity and 
maintenance of this group." professor at the 
explained that the Petitioner "achieved more that I could have imagined, completing a monumental 
and groundbreaking work," by "combining molecular phylogenetic approaches with the traditional 
taxonomic method.'' He also stated that her work is '' essential to projects that impact U.S. interest s. 
such as agriculture and biological control of pests:' 
Further , associate professor at the noted that the 
Petitioner's "background in spider systematics is truly one of a kind worldwide." He also stated that 
she "discovered and described more than 200 new spider species and genera (a higher rank than 
species in classification, and includes closed related species), and taxonomically revised more than 
160 spider taxa, all of which have been incorporated in a key reterence 
for researchers working on spider systematics and biodiversity. " Finally, the record includes ample 
documentary evidence supporting the aforementioned references ' statemen ts regarding the 
significance and originality of the Petitioner ' s work. 
Ill. CONCLUSION 
When considered in its totality , the evidence submitted supports a finding that the Petitioner is an 
individual of extraordinary ability consistent with a finding that she is one of a small percentage at 
the very top of the field of endeavor and that she has documented sustained acclaim. See section 
203(b)(l)(A) ofthe Act ; 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3): Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as lvfatter of J-Z- , ID# 879949 (AAO Feb. 13, 20 18) 
4