sustained EB-1A Case: Mechanical Engineering

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
'dentieing dara deleted to 
Prevent cleeriy unwma 
hion O~~~CZSQR~ *cu 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 
Of$ce of Administrative Appeals MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
FILE: Office: TEXAS SERVICE CENTER Date: OCT 2 6 2009 
SRC 08 268 51393 
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. $ 11 53(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. 
I!!>Q~ l , {L\ k, (/ : q\: L- 
% - 
'Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The employment-based immigrant visa petition was denied by the Director, Texas 
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. $ 1153(b)(l)(A), as an alien 
of extraordinary ability in the sciences. The director determined that the petitioner had not established 
he is among that small percentage who have risen to the very top of his field of endeavor. More 
specifically, the director found that the petitioner had failed to demonstrate receipt of a major, 
internationally recognized award, or that he meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(3). 
On appeal, counsel argues that the petitioner meets at least three of the regulatory criteria at 8 C.F.R. 
5 204.5(h)(3). 
Section 203(b) of the Act states, in pertinent part, that: 
(1) Priority 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. 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) 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. 5 204.5(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. $ 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 September 8, 2008, seeks to classify the petitioner as an alien with 
extraordinary ability as a mechanical engineering researcher. At the time of filing, the petitioner was 
working as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering at 
Texas A&M University, Kingsville. 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 alliedfield of specijication for which classEfication is 
sought. 
The petitioner submitted documentation indicating that that he reviewed a large number of 
manuscripts for multiple journals including Journal of Mechanical Design, Mechanism and Machine 
Theory, Robotica, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, and Mechanics Based Design of Structures 
and Machines. The petitioner also submitted evidence showing that he chaired technical sessions 
and reviewed papers for the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) "Design 
Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference" and 
the ASME "International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exposition." Accordingly, the 
petitioner has established that he meets this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scientzjk, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business- 
related contributions of major signzficance in the field. 
The petitioner submitted several letters of support discussing his original research contributions. We 
cite representative examples here. 
, Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Texas 
A&M University, Kingsville, states: 
[The petitioner] has developed creative mechanism design methods to optimize mechanisms 
and improve machine performance. His research paper about these novel design methods has 
been published in . . . Mechanism and Machine Theory. This paper has been very heavily 
cited in our field, thus indicating the strong influence of [the petitioner's] work. 
[The petitioner] developed innovative methods to optimize parameter adjustment. His 
methods provide convenient ways to obtain overall optimal adjustments of adjustable 
mechanisms. This is a significant and original contribution to the field of mechanism design. 
A key issue for parallel manipulators is how to improve and optimize the flexibility. [The 
petitioner] proposed novel methods and made significant contributions to this issue. The 
design methods he developed have laid the foundation for successful applications of these 
mechanisms. 
Hybrid mechanisms are mechanisms driven by two types of actuators, namely real-time non- 
adjustable (RTNA) and real-time adjustable (RTA). . . . The key issue for hybrid 
mechanisms is how to maximize the power requirement from RTNA actuators and minimize 
the power requirement from RTA actuators. [The petitioner] developed an innovative design 
method of hybrid mechanisms to solve that issue. His method is creative and unique and his 
contribution to the design of hybrid mechanisms is significant. 
[The petitioner] developed an innovative spanning tree based topology design method that 
regards the topology of a compliant mechanism as a network of connections that contains at 
least one spanning tree in it. This creative method has significantly overcome the challenge 
from topology design of compliant mechanisms. For geometry design, [The petitioner] 
developed an innovative wide curve based design method that uses a certain number of 
parameters to generate and optimize the geometry of a compliant mechanism. His creative 
method has tremendously simplified the design of compliant mechanisms. 
states: 
[The petitioner] was credited for introducing and pioneering the spanning tree theory and 
wide curve to the topology and geometry design of compliant mechanisms. . . . A compliant 
mechanism must be flexible to generate the desired motion and stiff to sustain the external 
loads. Such conflicting and demanding design requirements make the design of compliant 
mechanisms a challenging task. [The petitioner's] topology and geometric design 
methodology offers a viable approach to design and optimize compliant mechanisms. . . . 
[The petitioner] has made significant contributions in this cutting-edge research. 
[The petitioner] presented a novel design method for adjustable mechanisms and parallel 
mechanisms. The significance of his work is reflected in the frequent citation of his papers at 
both national and international levels. 
Page 5 
[The petitioner] recently presented an innovative design method for multi-material compliant 
mechanisms that can be used for prostheses and other applications. This research is cutting- 
edge. His research work is important for the successful development of new prostheses that 
have high performance, low cost and easy maintenance. 
and ASME Design Division Chair, Department of Engineering, 
University of Connecticut School of Engineering, states: 
Although I do not know [the petitioner] personally, I became aware of his research through 
his publications about mechanism design and compliant mechanisms. His great achievements 
are significant and have had an important impact on improving the design theories and 
methods of mechanisms. 
[The petitioner] made significant contributions on the design and development of important 
mechanisms including adjustable mechanisms, hybrid mechanisms and parallel 
mechanisms.. .. [The petitioner] has greatly simplified the design and development of these 
mechanisms. 
[The petitioner] recently introduced novel design methods of compliant mechanisms. . . . For 
both topology design and geometry design of compliant mechanisms, [the petitioner] created 
innovative design methods. His spanning-tree-based topology design method and wide- 
curve-based geometry design method have greatly simplified the challenging design 
processes of compliant mechanisms. 
states: 
The largest challenge for compliant mechanisms is the difficulty in designing them. [The 
petitioner] introduced two novel design methods of compliant mechanisms. In his topology 
design method, a compliant mechanism is considered as a network of input, output, support 
and other nodes. . . . This method significantly simplifies the topology optimization process 
and improves the design efficiency. With this method, no time-consuming deformation 
analysis and performance evaluation is needed for the large number of disconnected 
topologies. In [the petitioner's] geometry design method, every connection in a compliant 
mechanism is represented as a parametric wide curve in which the variable and complicated 
shape and size are fully described and conveniently controlled by a certain number of 
parameters. . . . With his creative method, the challenging geometry design of compliant 
mechanisms is greatly simplified. His findings have significant impacts on the design of 
compliant mechanisms. 
[The petitioner] introduced a design method for multi-material compliant mechanisms. . . . 
[The petitioner] created multi-layer wide curves to represent the multi-material connections 
in a multi-material compliant mechanism. . . . A multi-material compliant mechanism can be 
modeled and designed as a set of connected multi-layer wide curves by using [the 
petitioner's] method, which significantly simplifies the tough design problem. . . . [The 
petitioner's] significant contribution is critical to the development of multi-material 
compliant mechanisms. 
Institute of Science, states: 
[The petitioner] invented novel design methods of compliant mechanisms and made great 
contributions in this area. . . . His methods constitute significant breakthroughs in designing 
compliant mechanisms. 
[The petitioner] invented a novel topology design method by using spanning tree theory. 
Valid topologies contain at least one spanning tree among all the nodes and invalid 
topologies contain no spanning tree. [The petitioner] also invented a wide curve method that 
limits the number of parameters for dealing with shape and size in the design of compliant 
mechanisms. Both of these methods are major milestones in the advancement of compliant 
mechanisms design. 
In my research group, compliant mechanisms with different topologies and geometries are 
studied and designed for different purposes. We found that [the petitioner's] innovative 
design methods of compliant mechanisms are indeed very valuable for our own research and 
development work. His topology design method effectively removes invalid topologies from 
consideration and greatly facilitates the topology optimization process of compliant 
mechanisms. His wide curve design method improves the performance of compliant 
mechanisms by using and optimizing curved connections. . . . 
 Thus you can see the 
significant and widespread influence of [the petitioner's] contributions to our field. 
In support of the preceding experts' statements, the petitioner submitted documentation showing 
dozens of 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 evidence corroborates 
the independent experts' statements that the petitioner has made original contributions of major 
significance in his field. The record reflects that the petitioner's contributions are important not only 
to the institutions where he has worked, but throughout the greater field as well. Leading 
engineering scientists from around the world have acknowledged the value of the petitioner's work 
and its major significance in the mechanical engineering field. Accordingly, the petitioner has 
established that he meets this criterion. 
Page 7 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or 
major trade publications or other major media. 
The petitioner submitted evidence of his authorship of numerous articles in publications such as 
Journal of Mechanical Design, Mechanism and Machine Theory, and Mechatronics. As discussed, 
the petitioner also submitted evidence of dozens of articles that cite to his work. Accordingly, 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. 8 C.F.R. 5 204.5(h)(3). Pursuant to the statute and regulations, the 
petitioner qualifies for the 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. 8 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.