sustained EB-1A Case: Ocean Science

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
In Re : 13572239 
Appeal of Nebraska Service Center Decision 
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
Date : MAR . 1, 2021 
Form 1-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker (Extraordinary Ability) 
The Petitioner, a developer and manufacturer of scientific instrumentation, seeks to classify the 
Beneficiary, its company president, as an individual of extraordinary ability . See Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act) section 203(b)(l)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(A) . This first preference 
classification makes immigrant visas available to those who can demonstrate their extraordinary ability 
through sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in 
their field through extensive documentation. 
The Director of the Nebraska Service Center denied the petition , concluding that although the 
Petitioner submitted evidence to satisfy the initial evidence requirements for this classification, it did 
not demonstrate that the Beneficiary has sustained national or international acclaim and is among that 
small percentage who have risen to the very top of his field . The matter is now before us on appeal. 
In these proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to establish eligibility for the requested benefit. See 
Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C . § 1361. Upon de nova review, we conclude that the Petitioner has 
met this burden . Accordingly, we will sustain the appeal. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b )(1) of the Act makes visas available to immigrants with extraordinary ability 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 . 
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 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3) sets forth a multi-part analysis. First, a petitioner can demonstrate 
international recognition of a beneficiary's achievements in the field through a one-time achievement 
(that is, a major, internationally recognized award). If that petitioner does not submit this evidence, 
then it must provide sufficient qualifying documentation establishing that the beneficiary meets at 
least three of the ten 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 beneficiary is among the small percentage 
at the very top of the field of endeavor. See Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (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); Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F. Supp. 2d 1339 
(W.D. Wash. 2011). 
II. ANALYSIS 
At the time of filing, the Beneficiary was working in the United States as the president of the 
petitioning company. Because the Petitioner has not indicated or established that the Beneficiary has 
received a major, internationally recognized award, it must demonstrate that he satisfies at least three 
of the ten criteria at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x) to meet the initial evidentiary requirements. 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 
The Director determined that the Petitioner met three of the initial evidentiary criteria, relating to 
judging the work of others, authorship of scholarly articles, and performance in leading or critical roles 
for an organization with a distinguished reputation. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(iv), (vi) and (viii). The 
evidence in the record supports the Director's determination based on the Beneficiary's work as a peer 
reviewer for professional journals in his field, his authorship of scholarly articles, and his critical and 
leading roles with the Petitioner, which has submitted ample evidence of its distinguished reputation 
in its industry. 
On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that the Beneficiary has also made original scientific contributions 
of major significance in the field of ocean science and.......,,. _______ --.::,;,....,. consistent with 8 
C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(v) and asserts that he is otherwise qualified for classification as an individual of 
extraordinary ability based on the previously submitted evidence. 
Because the Petitioner has established that the Beneficiary meets the requisite three evidentiary 
criteria, he has satisfied the initial evidence requirements. Therefore, we will consider the evidence 
submitted in support of the original contributions criterion, together with the balance of the record, to 
determine whether he possesses the level of sustained acclaim and standing in his field to establish his 
eligibility as an individual of extraordinary ability. 
2 
B. Final Merits Determination 
As the Petitioner submitted the requisite initial evidence, we will evaluate whether it has demonstrated, 
by a preponderance of the evidence, the Beneficiary's sustained national or international acclaim, that 
he is one of the small percentage at the very top of the field of endeavor, and that his achievements 
have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation. In a final merits determination, 
we analyze a beneficiary's accomplishments and weigh the totality of the evidence to determine if 
their successes are sufficient to demonstrate that they have extraordinary ability in the field of 
endeavor. See section 203(b)(l)(A)(i) of the Act; 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2), (3); see also Kazarian, 
596 F.3d at 1119-20. 1 In the present matter, the Petitioner has demonstrated the Beneficiary's 
eligibility for this classification. 
The record reflects that the Beneficiary completed his education at the University._! _____ __. 
where he received his bachelor of science, master of science, and doctorate degrees in geography. 
After completing his graduate studies in 2001, he worked for the Petitioner as an external scientific 
consultant. Between 2002 and 2007, the Beneficiary worked as a post-doctoral fellow at I I 
University and.I !oceanography id I, Canada, and as a research officer 
at the University ofl I School of Ocean Sciences. The Beneficiary accepted a senior scientist 
position with the Petitioner in 2007, later served as the Petitioner's vice president, and has been 
employed as its president since January 2019. Between 2014 and 2018, the Beneficiary worked in 
Europe fo~ l ~ I scientific instrument company. 
Overall, the record supports the Petitioner's claim that the Beneficiary's work, both as a researcher 
and in leading and critical roles with the petitioning company, has had a significant impact in the field 
of marine geology that has contributed to his sustained acclaim. Specifically, the record demonstrates 
his contributions to scientists' understanding o~ I in the aquatic environment and in 
advancing the scientific instruments and technologies used to measure and understand these I I 
particularly with respect to the the Petitioner's uniquel I technology. 
As noted, the Beneficiary is currently employed as the Petitioner's president and has previously held 
senior leadership and scientific roles with the company. The Petitioner has established that it enjoys 
an important and unique role in its industry as the only manufacturer of portable,~------~ 
I I instrumentation suitable for use in underwater environments. The record reflects that 
researchers at universities, consulting firms, and government agencies around the world rely on its 
I I instruments to conduct fundamental aquatic I I research, to carry out I I studies and 
I !assessments, and to respond to I ~,I , ( and othe~ I 
disasters. The record contains many examples of the importance of this technology to scientific 
1 See also USCTS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0005.1, Evaluation of Evidence Submitted with Certain Form T-140 
Petitions; Revisions to the Adjudicator's Field Manual (AFM) Chapter 22.2, AFM Update ADl 1-14 9 (Dec. 22, 2010), 
https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/HTML/PolicyManual.html. (stating that USCTS officers should then evaluate the 
evidence together when considering the petition in its entirety to determine if the petitioner has established, by a 
f
reponderance of the evidence the required high level of expertise for the immigrant classificati9lll----------, 
._ _____________________ ....,..I instruments used for measuring~ and the D 
~ties of water. The record reflects that thy Petitioner 1.levelops and manufactures a line of instruments under the 
L___J brand name that rely on) u_ .,. ..,. .., . and I !technologies, and are specifically 
designed for use in ocean and other aquatic environments. 
3 
research, the environment, and the public. For instance, the United States Envirnnmenta) Protection 
~ncy mandated thau Is be used on all vessels responding to the 2010 I I 
L_J in the Gulf of Mexico. 
The Petitioner has also provided detailed and probative descriptions of the Beneficiary's own critical 
scientific and leadership contributions to the company's product development and research efforts, 
indicating that he has been instrumental to its more recent product releases 
I I, and the refinement of its older product lines since initially .... jo-1-.n-in-g-th-e-co_m_p_a_n_y_i__,n 
2007. The Petitioner and other experts in the field have also weighed in on the Beneficiary's earlier 
research, its relevance to the development and enhancement of its I I technologies, and his 
influence on the use ot1 lin his field. For example,! ] a research 
oceanographer with the~ ________ __, explains that years prior to joining the petitioning 
company, the Beneficiary was one of the earliest users oQ and published several analyses of the 
instrument that are "foundational in the scientific literature concerning the use ofl I in the coastal 
ocean."I I co-founder ot1 la I I marine survey and consulting firm, 
also discusses the inlluence of the Petitioner's early research us ind I technology, no tin~ that he 
1 
was the first in the world to demonstrate how researchers can estimate I I and 
I ~ using thel I and spurring "an avalanche ofliterally hundreds of papers usin 
results, almost all of them citing one or several of [the Beneficiary's] papers."I I explains that, 
while working for the Petitioner, the Beneficiary has farther contributed to the development of 
instrumentation and techniques that have been critical to research work in the field of I I 
I I 
The Petitioner has also successfully demonstrated that its senior staff are well-known leaders in the 
field whcj remain unusually active in collaborative scientific research at the international level. D 
I Professor of Oceanography atl I University inl l Canada, explains that 
the Petitioner "is one of very few manufacturers that maintains a presence within the ocean science 
community by actively publishing original scientific results and presenting new technolo~ 
constantly moving technology forward for the benefit of the global aquatic scientific community.'L_J 
Oexplains that the Beneficiary "is well-recognized within the ocean science community as having 
a long track record of excellent and outstanding work within the field ofl I' both 
based on his contributions to the Petitioner's technologies and related publications, and based on his 
earlier work as a researcher. The record documents that the Beneficiary has been invited to present 
the Petitioner's latest products and research at dozens of conferences worldwide[ farther contributing 
to his international acclaim. I lalso emphasizes in his letter thatl users and customers 
regularly seek the Beneficiary's input and participation in their original published research as farther 
evidence of his reputation as a "recognized leader in his field." 
In addition, several of the expert recommendation letters emphasize that the Beneficiary has made a 
major contribution to the field and cemented his international re utation by founding, organiyng, andl 
leading/chairing the Petitioner's bi-annual conference series, which 
describes as "a major conference for research related t in the aquatic environment." 
I p of the University~-~-~ in the United Kingdom describes as "an 
indispensable forum for scientists working in the field of aquatic! I' while.__--,--,------.~---' 
ofl I University i~ I Virginia, opines that "the importance of the workshops 
in advancing the collaboration and exchange of ideas amongst scientists working mainly in the aquatic 
4 
environment cannot be overstated." The record reflects that D has been held in partnership with 
universities in France, Spain, Denmark, Hungary, and Portugal since 2008 and has published its 
conference proceedings in a special issue of the professional journal Geo-Marine Letters for which 
the Beneficiary, as conference chair, served as the guest editor. 
Based on the foregoing, the evidence establishes that both the Beneficiary's leading and critical roles 
with the Petitioner and his related scientific contributions have garnered him sustained acclaim and 
place him among the small percentage at the top of a field in which the petitioning company maintains 
a high profile as an industry leader. 
The record also indicates that the Petitioner has reviewed numerous manuscripts for at least twelve 
different professional publications in his field. He has also served as guest editor for the 
aforementioned spect) issue of Geo-Matne Letters, and, as discussed above, is the founder and co­
chair of the bi-annua~------~conference, which the record reflects is regarded by experts 
as a major conference in his area of expertise. We find the Beneficiary's extensive judging experience, 
when reviewed together with the achievements described above, to be consistent with a determination 
that he is among the small percentage at the top of his field of endeavor. See 8 C.F .R. § 204.5(h)(2). 
The Petitioner has also provided evidence of the Beneficiary's authorship of a considerable amount of 
published material, including numerous articles that appeared in distinguished professional journals. 
As authoring scholarly articles is inherent to scientists and researchers, the citation history and other 
evidence of the influence of a beneficiary's articles can be an important indicator of the impact and 
recognition that his work has had on the field and whether such influence has been sustained. The 
Petitioner argues that the Beneficiary has spent most of his post-graduate career in private industry 
and asserts that the Director inappropriately compared his publication record and citation history to 
those of scientists who work as researchers or in academia in determining that his citation history did 
not reflect that he is among the small percentage of individuals at the very top of his field. In this 
regard, the Petitioner emphasizes that the approximately 1500 citations the Beneficiary has received 
should be considered in light of the totality of the evidence and the additional acclaim he has achieved 
as a senior scientist and leader for a private company that occupies a unique position in its specialized 
industry and provides essential research tools to scientists working in the ocean science field on a 
worldwide basis. 
The Petitioner also highlights its submission of letters from experts that address in detail the 
significance of the Beneficiary's earlier published research related to....__ ________ __,. For 
example, the record reflects that, during his post-graduate fellowship, the Beneficiary developed a 
platform calledl :Jfor the investi ation ofi lin the aquatic environment close 
to the seabedl ~cribes as a "significant technological and scientific advance" and 
states that derivatives of~--~are still in use 15 years after the Beneficiary first published his 
research. Several of the letters also credit the Beneficiary with pioneering the use of a statistical 
method called entropy analysis for the characterization of L...- __ __,...----_..._ __ ,___Jexplains that 
this method has since been "used ~s ranging from basic · es of 
I ~ matter ... toL___J studies to evaluate the--------~--~ - an 
important parameter when trying to I I after anl I' ~---~ confirms that the 
Beneficiary's I I method has been used by many other researchers and notes its 
application to studies of the environmental impact of aquaculture sites and in climate studies. ~ 
5 
~----~!summarizes the Beneficiary's papers and asserts that both his research contributions 
and his contributions to the Petitioner's products "are well-recognized in the scientific community and 
have enhanced the quality of research in the field." 
Although the Beneficiary is currently working in the private sector, he continues to publish his work 
and maintains a high profile as a leader in his scientific community as evidenced by his senior role 
with the Petitioner, his frequent attendance as an invited speak~d presenter at major international 
conferences, and his position as the founder and co-chair of thel_Jconference. 
When considered in the aggregate with the evidence discussed above, the Petitioner has demonstrated 
that the Beneficiary's achievements are reflective of a "career of acclaimed work in the field" as 
contemplated by Congress. H.R. Rep. No. 101-723, 59 (Sept. 19, 1990). The record supports a finding 
that the Beneficiary is among the small percentage at the top of his field of endeavor with sustained 
national or international acclaim. See 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(2)-(3). 
III. CONCLUSION 
The Petitioner has shown that the Beneficiary meets at least three of the evidentiary criteria listed at 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). The Petitioner has also demonstrated the Beneficiary's sustained 
national and international acclaim and that his achievements have been recognized through extensive 
documentation. For these reasons, we conclude that the Beneficiary qualifies for classification as an 
individual of extraordinary ability. 
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
6