Skip to content

Case study · EB-1A · Denied

EB-1A denied at step one: two criteria met, and the rest undone by evidence quality

A denial that reads like a checklist of what not to submit: nominations as awards, post-filing evidence, user-edited websites, untranslated and illegible copies.

All case studies

EB-1ADenied
Source
Adjudicator notice (de-identified)
Timeline
RFE January 2024, response April 2024, denial April 2024
Key lesson

File only evidence that existed at the time of filing for each claim.

Profile

Technology consultant and entrepreneur with conference presentations, collaborated papers and a dissolved US company.

What was claimed

  • JudgingMet
  • Scholarly articlesMet
  • AwardsNot met
  • MembershipNot met
  • Published materialNot met
  • Original contributionsNot met
  • Leading or critical roleNot met
  • High salaryNot met

What happened

Awards: announcements and invitations to nominate did not show the award with the applicant's name on it. Evidence dated after filing could not be used because eligibility must exist at the time of filing.

Membership: nominations are not memberships. Membership evidence dated after filing was excluded, and a LinkedIn page carried no weight as a user-edited source. Membership in a credentialing body does not count as an association requiring outstanding achievements.

Published material: foreign-language items had no certified translation, scanned copies were illegible, incomplete or altered, and articles missing title, date or author were not counted. Wikipedia, social media and a publication's own media kit were not accepted as independent proof.

Original contributions: conference presentations are expected of professionals, and publications without independent citations do not show influence on the field.

Leading or critical role: the company had been dissolved, the applicant may have been self-employed or a contractor, and internally produced documents do not prove reputation. Salary: no objective data comparing the applicant with others in the same kind of work.

Because fewer than three criteria were met, the officer did not reach final merits.

Lessons for evaluating your own case

Every notice is a list of what to fix. Use these as a checklist for your own evidence.

  • File only evidence that existed at the time of filing for each claim.
  • Provide certified translations, legible originals and complete items with title, date and author.
  • Do not rely on LinkedIn, Wikipedia or a publication's own circulation claims. Use independent sources.
  • A nomination or invitation is not an award or a membership.
  • A company that has been dissolved or a contract role makes the distinguished-reputation and leading-role claims harder, so choose criteria with that in mind.
Anonymized. Personal details, employers, receipt numbers, officer codes and law firms are removed. This is general information, not legal advice.
← EB-1A DeniedEB-1A Refile planning →

See how your evidence maps to the criteria

Meritocrat's free assessment maps your evidence to EB-1A, EB-2 NIW and O-1 criteria and shows the gaps, using patterns from cases like this one.

Get your free assessment
Best practices for case evaluation