sustained EB-1A Case: Stem Cell Biology And Neuroscience

U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
MATTER OF Y-X-
Non-Precedent Decision of the 
Administrative Appeals Office 
DATE: SEPT. 23,20105 
APPEAL OF NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER DECISION 
PETITION: FORM I-140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER 
The Petitioner, an individual who works in the area of stem cell biology, developmental biology, and 
neuroscience, seeks classification as a person "of extraordinary ability." See Immigration and 
Nationality Act (the Act)§ 203(b)(l)(A); 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)(l)(A). The Director, Nebraska Service 
Center, denied the petition. The matter is now before us on appeal. The appeal will be sustained. 
The classification the Petitioner seeks makes visas available to foreign nationals 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 
determined that the Petitioner satisfied the initial evidentiary requirements of showing either (a) a 
one-time achievement or (b) documentation that meets at least three of the ten regulatory criteria set 
forth at 8 C.F.R §§ 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). However, after an analysis of the totality of the evidence 
provided, the Director determined that the record did not reflect her extraordinary ability. On 
appeal, the Petitioner submits a brief and other materials. For the reasons discussed below, the 
Petitioner has established eligibility for the classification sought. 
I. LAW 
Section 203(b) of the Act states in pertinent part: 
(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 
lvfatter of Y-X-
(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 regulation at 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3) sets forth two different methods by which a petitioner can exhibit extraordinary ability 
sustained by national or international acclaim and the recognition ofthe petitioner's achievement in 
the field. First, a petitioner may show a one-time achievement (that is, a major, internationally 
recognized award). Second, a petitioner can satisfy at least three of the ten categories listed at 
8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x). If a petitioner opts for this second method of demonstrating 
extraordinary ability, the analysis is two-part: First, we assess whether the petitioner has satisfied at 
least three of the ten categories. If so, we then assess the record in its totality to determine if the 
petitioner is indeed one of those individuals in that small percentage who have risen to the very top 
of the field of endeavor. See Kazarian v. USCJS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9
1
h Cir. 2010) (discussing a two­
part review where the evidence is first counted and then, if satisfying the required number of criteria, 
considered in the context of a final merits determination). See also Rijal v. USCIS, 772 F.Su~p.2d 
1339 (W.D. Wash. 2011) (affirming our proper application of Kazarian), aff'd, 683 F.3d. 1030 (91 Cir. 
2012); Visinscaia v. Beers, 4 F.Supp.3d 126, 131-32 (D.D.C. 2013) (finding that we appropriately 
applied the two-step review); Matter ofChawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 376 (AAO 201 0) (holding that 
the "truth is to be determined not by the quantity of evidence alone but by its quality" and that U.S. 
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) examines "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"). 
II. ANALYSIS 
A. Evidentiary Criteria 1 
The Petitioner has satisfied the following 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 specification for which classification is sought 
The Director determined that the Petitioner demonstrated eligibility for this criterion. A review of 
the record reflects that the Petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence to show that she 
participated as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field, as required by 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(iv). Specifically, at the time of initial filing, the Petitioner had served as a peer­
reviewer for four scientific journals, as well as evaluated grant applications for the Research Grants 
1 We have reviewed all of the evidence the Petitioner has submitted and will address those criteria the 
Petitioner claims to meet or for which the Petitioner has submitted relevant and probative evidence. 
2 
(b)(6)
Matter of Y-X-
Council of the _ Special Administrative Region government. Accordingly, the Petitioner -
has met this criterion. 
Evidence of the alien's original scient(fic, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related 
contributions of major sign(ficance in the field. 
The Director determined that the Petitioner demonstrated eligibility for this criterion. A review of 
the record reflects that the Petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence to show that she 
made original contributions of major significance in the field, as required by 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(v). Specifically, the Petitioner's discoveries relating to 
and remodelers were of major significance in the field. Accordingly, the Petitioner 
has met this criterion . 
Evidence of the alien's authorship of scholarly articles in the .field, in professional or major 
trade publications or other major media. 
The Director determined that the Petitioner satisfied this criterion. A review of the record reflects 
that the Petitioner submitted sufficient documentary evidence to show that she authored scholarly 
articles in professional or major trade publications or other major media, as required by 8 C.F.R. 
§ 204.5(h)(3)(vi). Accordingly, the Petitioner has met this criterion. 
B. Summary 
The Petitioner has submitted the requisite initial evidence to satisfy three of the ten regulatory 
criteria. 
C. Final Merits Determination 
The next step is a final merits determination that considers all of the evidence in the context of 
whether or not the Petitioner has demonstrated : ( 1) 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 ," 
and (2) "that the alien has sustained national or international acclaim and that his or her 
achievements have been recognized in the field of expertise." Section 203(b)(l)(A) of the Act; 8 
C.F.R. §§ 204.5(h)(2) , (h)(3). See also Kazarian, 596 F.3d at 1119-20. 
In the denial, the Director concluded that, although the Petitioner satisfied three of the ten criteria 
listed at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(i)-(x), the totality of the evidence in the record did not demonstrate a 
level of expertise indicating she is one of the small percentage at the top of the field who has 
sustained national or international acclaim. On appeal, the Petitioner states that the Director erred by 
minimizing her journal review, giving insufficient consideration to independent advisory opinions , 
and overlooking the prestige of the journals publishing and citing to her work. 
The Petitioner received her degree in Clinical Medicine from 
received her Ph.D. in Anatomy and Neurobiology from the 
3 
in China . She 
in 2008. She has 
(b)(6)
Matter of Y-X-
been performing research at from 2008 to the present. According to the 
Petitioner, the focus of her work in the field of stem cell biology, developmental biology, and 
neuroscience has been the focus of her research that led to discoveries regarding (a) the role of 
, and (b) remodelers. 
Based on her research performed at the 
authored articles on the role of 
and 
the Petitioner published three first­
The articles were published in the 
At the time she submitted 
the instant petition , Google Scholar reported these articles had received 96, 35 and 12 citations, 
respectively. 
In a reference letter,2 Professor of Pharmacology at the 
in Italy, explained that the Petitioner discovered the essential role of a 
reactive oxygen species, in tissue damage following spinal cord injury. He indicated that the 
Petitioner was the first to characterize a complete time course of 
damage and cytoskeletal breakdown after spinal cord injury, which allowed her to identify that 
is involved in lipid damage as well as protein nitrative damage. This 
finding was an important discovery, not only because it opened up a new avenue of research in 
damage, but also because it provided a drug target for early pharmacological 
intervention for acute spinal cord injury. The Petitioner further discovered that a 
scavenger, decomposes free radicals in rodents, establishing a promising 
therapeutic strategy. referred to numerous follow-up studies based on the Petitioner 's 
findings, and confirmed that he himself had cited her work in two of his own research papers. 
According to her supervisor at the Cardiovascular Institute at the 
the Petitioner led four different projects in the lab and was the lead 
investigator for a grant from the The Petitioner 's accomplishments while at 
include the publication of an article regarding the role of two remodelers, 
and _ the first ranked scientific journal , published the article 
in 2010. As of _ 2014, Google Scholar reported 145 citations to the article. The Petitioner 
also published two first-authored articles in 2013 on the role of another remodeler, 
These articles were published in the 
ranked of scientific journals , and ranked of journals in the field of 
Developmental Biology . 
. an Assistant Professor in the Department of Genetics at the 
explained the significance ofthe Petitioner's discoveries: 
2 The Petitioner provided ten letters of recommendation that discuss her work. Although we discuss only a 
sampling of these letters , we reviewed and considered each one. 
4 
(b)(6)
Matter of Y-X-
Neural crest cells (NCCs) are one subtype of stem cells that have the 
capability to expand and differentiate into a variety of specialized cells and migrate 
throughout the body, forming important tissues and organs. Disruption of the NCCs 
development can cause many common congenital diseases in human ... Moreover, 
it's well known that all the genetic information of cells (about 6 meters long DNA) is 
packed in highly condensed (about 10 nm). remodelers like 
are important to "open up" the chromatin 's structure and 
expose the DNA for the transcriptional factors to bind and then the gene and protein 
expression occurs. How NCC is formed and programmed to proliferate, differentiate 
and migrate was poorly understood. [The Petitioner] applied state-of-art technologies 
to unravel the epigenetic mechanisms that puzzled the scientists for decades. 
goes on to highlight the Petitionc:r' s specific findings regarding the role of The 
Petitioner discovered that, without , mouse embryos developed cerebral arteries insufficiency , 
disrupted pharyngeal arch arteries, and shorter cardiac outflow tracts. These deficiencies highly 
mimic NCC-related human diseases. Most significantly , the Petitioner discovered that 
interacts with a -containing complex to regulate the NCC transcriptional factors, gene 
expression, and migration. As confirmed by this finding provides a direct answer to 
the long unsolved question of how NCCs are regulated. 
Assistant Professor at further 
emphasized the importance of the Petitioner's discovery regarding the role of According to 
the Petitioner was the first to examine the role of remodelers in the skin stem 
cell field. Because the Petitioner's theory and novel pathway were so original, wrote a 
commentary article to further introduce the work. The commentary was accepted and published in 
Professor at the 
provided further information regarding the significance of the Petitioner 's 
findings: 
[the Petitioner], for the first time in the world, found that the deletion of 
a gene, called in HF stem cells abrogate the ability of these cells to regenerate 
hair follicle and epidermis in wounded skin of mice. The new mouse model that [the 
Petitioner] generated provides an unprecedented technique for scientists to investigate 
the packing and unpacking of genes in HF stem cells during hair and epidermis 
regeneration. Using this mouse model, many scientists have applied (the Petitioner's] 
findings to understand and quantify the role of in the activation of hair follicle 
stem cells and to design medicines. 
Both the reference letters and the corroborating articles in the record indicate that the Petitioner 's 
research is respected and influential in the field. Many of the citing articles are themselves 
published in top joumals. In addition to the articles described above, the Petitioner first-authored a 
chapter in the book, She also first-authored a review article 
5 
(b)(6)
Matter of Y-X-
published in speaks to the prestige of an invitation to 
write review articles. The Petitioner also acted as a peer-reviewer numerous times for four different 
scientific journals, including ranked number one in the field of 
dermatology. In 2013, the Petitioner was selected to be a speaker at the 
According to Professor at the 
the is the most influential and largest conference in the field of 
Every year it attracts over 400 researchers from all over the world, and the Petitioner 
was one of four speakers selected from about 200 abstracts in the congenital heart disease field. 
The Petitioner's success as a researcher indicates that she is one of the small percentage at the very 
top of her field. Her publishing history is of exceptional quality. Many of the journals that have 
published her work are the most prestigious in their field. Beyond acceptance by these journals, the 
Petitioner has also demonstrated that her work has had a significant 
impact after publication, both 
through the number and quality of citations, as well as through the qualitative descriptions provided 
in her reference letters. The Petitioner provided further documentation of her acclaim with her 
selection as a speaker at the and her first-authorship of a textbook chapter 
and review article. With respect to her review responsibilities, not only has she engaged as a peer 
review for multiple journals, she has reviewed grants for the Research Grants Council under the 
auspices of the According to the materials in the record, the council 
funds eight institutions of higher learning in and one of its main functions is to offer 
impartial and respected expert advice to the government. Lastly, we note that the Petitioner is 
currently conducting her research at one of the top medical schools in the world. In the 
aggregate, the record confirms that the Petitioner is considered a leader in the field of stem cell 
biology, developmental biology, and neuroscience who has extraordinary ability. 
In light of the evidence discussed above and other corroborating documents of record, the 
Petitioner's achievements in the aggregate are commensurate with sustained national and 
international acclaim at the very top of her field. 
III. CONCLUSION 
The documentation submitted in support of a claim of extraordinary ability must show that the 
Petitioner has achieved sustained national or international acclaim and is one of the small percentage 
of individuals at the very top of her field of endeavor. When considered in light of the analysis 
outlined in the Kazarian decision, the Petitioner submitted has submitted the requisite evidence to 
satisfy three evidentiary categories and also to demonstrate that she has established his extraordinary 
ability when considered in a final merits decision. 
In visa petition proceedings, it is the Petitioner's burden to demonstrate eligibility for the 
immigration benefit sought. Section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1361; Matter of Otiende, 26 I&N 
Dec. 127, 128 (BIA 2013). Here, the Petitioner has met that burden. She has shown that her 
achievements have been recognized in her field, that she seeks to continue to work in that same field 
in the United States, and that her entry will substantially benefit the United States. Therefore , the 
Petitioner has established eligibility for the benefit 
sought under section 203(b )(1 )(A) of the Act. 
h 
Matter ofY-X-
ORDER: The appeal is sustained. 
Cite as Matter ofY-X-, ID# 13184 (AAO Sept. 23, 2015)