Filed EB-1A I-140 under Premium Processing on Dec 22, 2025. Received RFE on Jan 15, where only 1 criteria (authorship of scholarly article) was initially recognized. Responded to the RFE with additional evidence on Apr 8. Petition was denied on Apr 27, 2026. In the final decision, the officer acknowledged 4 criteria were met, but denied the case at the Final Merits stage.
My background: Electrical Engineer, Masters from Harvard, 15+ years experience in energy sector. Worked with UN agency and Corporate, currently consulting for World Bank. Recipient of several awards in my home country and also at Harvard. IEEE Senior Member.
The original contributions I claimed: Published peer-reviewed IEEE research articles, Committee work, Co-authored opinion article and Consultant work
Criteria met (4):
- Participation as a judge of others' work in the field
- Authorship of scholarly articles in professional journals (5 IEEE publications, 43 citations)
- Performance in a leading or critical role for distinguished organizations
- High salary relative to others in the field
Criteria not met (4):
- Receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards —officer found my Harvard Award lacked sufficient publicity documentation. This award was voted by my peers and classmates specifically for outstanding work in the energy sector and is published on the Harvard website. However, the officer's position was that there was insufficient contemporaneous publicity at the time the award was given.
- Membership in associations requiring outstanding achievement of their members — found my memberships did not meet the outstanding achievement threshold
- Published material about me in professional or major trade publications, found coverage was not in sufficiently major outlets. My interview and publications were covered in top media in my home country.
- Original contributions of major significance to the field — officer acknowledged my work but did not find it rose to the level of major significance
Then denied at Final Merits saying — even setting aside the criteria count — the totality of evidence does not demonstrate I am among the small percentage at the very top of my field, and that my work will substantially benefit the United States prospectively.
Specific evidence weaknesses the officer noted:
- Salary benchmarking used only median figures rather than the full compensation range
- Citation count of 43 was not contextualized within my specific subfield
- Media coverage was not in major international mainstream outlets
- Harvard Award lacked contemporaneous publicity documentation
Any specific advice on reconsider/reopen motion or refile or appeal?