Major significance is a separate proof from originality. Evidence has to show influence on the field beyond the employer or project: independent citations discussing the work, adoption or licensing by others, commentary, and standards or policy influence.
Profile
Researcher with about 430 citations, two patents (one granted) and participation in funded projects, not as principal investigator.
What was claimed
- Original scholarly contributionsMet
- JudgingMet
- Original contributions of major significanceNot met
What happened
The officer accepted the scholarly authorship and judging criteria and challenged the major-significance criterion.
After the RFE response, the applicant's representative suggested withdrawing the case and refiling later, citing the odds of approval. The applicant asked whether others had been approved after similar RFEs or had withdrawn and refiled successfully.
Lessons for evaluating your own case
Every notice is a list of what to fix. Use these as a checklist for your own evidence.
- Major significance is a separate proof from originality. Evidence has to show influence on the field beyond the employer or project: independent citations discussing the work, adoption or licensing by others, commentary, and standards or policy influence.
- Participation in funded projects is stronger when the role is specific: what the applicant designed or led, not that the project was funded.
- Withdrawal can reset the clock and the strategy but also gives up the chance to respond. Decide with a written comparison of what new evidence you can add and when.
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