Humanities: regional history and culture scholarship
The AAO dismissed the appeal because, although the petitioner showed intent to continue working in his field in the United States, he did not establish that he is among the small percentage at the very top of the field.
Summarized by AI. Summaries on this site are written by AI and can contain errors. Always read the full decision on uscis.gov before relying on anything here. If a summary differs from the official decision, the official decision controls.
Summary
A scholar in the humanities appealed the denial of an extraordinary ability petition. The AAO agreed with the Director that three evidentiary criteria were met and found that the petitioner's own statement adequately detailed his plans to continue working in his field in the United States. In the final merits analysis, however, it declined to consider his citation evidence because it was submitted too late, saying it would not have established the claimed achievement anyway, and it found that his translation project, a certificate of gratitude, a newspaper interview, and support letters did not place him at the very top of his field. The appeal was dismissed.
Findings
| Criterion / prong | AAO finding | From the decision |
|---|---|---|
| (i) Lesser nationally or internationally recognized awards | Not reached | |
| (iii) Published material about the person | Met | published material about him and his work in the field |
| (iv) Judging the work of others | Met | his participation as a judge of |
| (vi) Authorship of scholarly articles | Met | his authorship of scholarly articles in his field |
Why the AAO decided this way
- The AAO agreed that the petitioner met three evidentiary criteria and found that his initial statement sufficiently detailed his U.S. work plans, so it withdrew the Director's contrary finding on intent to continue working in the field.
- Evidence of how often his articles were cited was first submitted on appeal after the Director had requested it, so the AAO declined to consider it, and it said the evidence would not have established the claimed achievement anyway.
- His selection as one of several translators on a major project, a certificate of gratitude shared by all of the project's translators, and a newspaper interview did not show that he stands at the top of his field.
- The letters from other researchers mostly repeated his accomplishments and lacked detail on the significance of his research, so the evidence even in the aggregate did not place him among the small percentage at the top.
Authorities cited
- Matter of Chawathe, 25 I&N Dec. 369, 375-76 (AAO 2010)
- Matter of Christo's, Inc., 26 I&N Dec. 537, 537 n.2 (AAO 2015)
- Amin v. Mayorkas, 24 F.4th 383, 391 (5th Cir. 2022)
- INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976)
- Matter of Soriano, 19 I&N Dec. 764, 766 (BIA 1988)
Read the full decision on uscis.gov ↗
Please describe the error only. Do not send personal or case information. Anything you send will not be treated as confidential, and an error report does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Report an error in this summary