sustained EB-1A Case: Chemistry
Decision Summary
The appeal was sustained because the AAO determined that the petitioner's evidence satisfied at least three of the regulatory criteria. The decision highlights that the petitioner's service as a peer reviewer for scientific publications met the 'judging the work of others' criterion. Additionally, multiple expert letters confirmed the petitioner made original scientific contributions of major significance to the field of chemistry, such as his discovery of the regioselectivity of metal fragment exchange.
Criteria Discussed
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →Draft with AAO-aware legal structure
MeritDraft helps you turn research into a criteria-based petition draft with organized evidence, legal framing, and attorney-ready structure.
Start a Criteria-Based Draft →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.