Chicago Immigration Lawyer Blog

The O-1A visa is designed for individuals who possess extraordinary abilities in the sciences, arts, business, athletics, or education. To be eligible for this visa, you must meet certain criteria, including demonstrating that you have commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field.  Our immigration attorney at the Chicago law office of Zneimer & Zneimer provide information how to meet this criterion.

This criterion requires evidence that the applicant has commanded a high salary or other significantly high remuneration for services, in relation to others in the field. Here’s what you need to know to demonstrate your eligibility:

1. Determine whether your salary or remuneration is high relative to others in the field: Evidence regarding whether your compensation is high relative to that of others working in the field may take many forms.  Examples may include, but are not limited to, geographical or position-appropriate compensation surveys and organizational justifications to pay above the compensation data.

The O-1A visa is designed for individuals who possess extraordinary abilities in the sciences, arts, business, athletics, or education. To be eligible for this visa, you must meet certain criteria, including demonstrating evidence that you have performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation.  The immigration attorneys at Zneimer & Zneimer provide analysis of this criterion.

This criterion requires evidence that the applicant has performed in a leading or critical role for organizations or establishments that have a distinguished reputation. Here’s what you need to know to demonstrate your eligibility:

1. Determine whether you have performed in leading or critical roles for organizations or establishments: In evaluating such evidence, USCIS officers must examine whether the role is (or was) leading or critical.

If you are an exceptional individual in the arts seeking to work and live in the United States, the O-1A visa may be the perfect solution for you. This non-immigrant visa is designed for individuals who possess extraordinary abilities in the sciences, arts, business, athletics, or education.  Our immigration attorneys at Zneimer & Zneimer have analyzed this criterion and what is required to meet it.  This criterion requires evidence of the display of the applicant’s work in the field at artistic exhibitions or showcases. Here’s what you need to know to demonstrate your eligibility:

1. Determine whether the work that was displayed is your work product: The description of this type of evidence in the regulation provides that the work must be the applicant‘s.
2. Determine whether the venues (virtual or otherwise) where your work was displayed were artistic exhibitions or showcases: Webster’s online dictionary defines an exhibition as a public showing and a showcase as a setting, occasion, or medium for exhibiting something or someone, especially in an attractive or favorable aspect.

If you’re an exceptional individual seeking to work and live in the United States, the O-1A visa may be the perfect solution for you. This non-immigrant visa is designed for individuals who possess extraordinary abilities in the sciences, arts, business, athletics, or education. However, to be eligible for this visa, you must meet certain criteria, including demonstrating that you have authored scholarly articles in your field.  The Chicago immigration attorneys at Zneimer & Zneimer have reviewed and analyzed this criteria based on the regulations and appellate decisions.

This criterion requires evidence of the authorship of scholarly articles in the field, in professional or major trade publications, or other major media publications. Here’s what you need to know to demonstrate your eligibility:

1. Determine whether you have authored scholarly articles in your field: A scholarly article reports on original research, experimentation, or philosophical discourse. It is written by a researcher or expert in the field who is often affiliated with a college, university, or research institution. In general, it should have footnotes, endnotes, or a bibliography, and may include graphs, charts, videos, or pictures as illustrations of the concepts expressed in the article.

The O-1A visa is a non-immigrant visa that is designed for individuals who possess extraordinary abilities in the sciences, arts, business, athletics, or education. However, to be eligible for this visa, you must meet certain criteria, including demonstrating that you have made original contributions of major significance to your field. This criterion is laid out in 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3)(v), which requires USCIS officers to evaluate whether your work constitutes major, significant contributions to your field. Simply having published or funded work is not sufficient to establish that your work is of major significance. Instead, USCIS officers will consider other factors, such as peer-reviewed presentations or articles that have received widespread commentary or notice from others in the field.  The immigration attorneys at the Chicago law office of Zneimer & Zneimer have analyzed the requirements through appellate decisions and regulations.

In order to satisfy this criterion, a petitioner must establish not only that the beneficiary has made original contributions but that they have been of major significance in the field. For example, it may support the record with evidence that a beneficiary’s contributions have been widely implemented, have remarkably impacted or influenced the field, or have otherwise risen to a level of major significance in the field. Demonstrating ability as a skilled worker, or a specialist with unique or advanced skills is not itself a contribution of major significance; rather, the Petitioner must demonstrate that the Beneficiary has impacted the field as a whole.  the Beneficiary’s possession of unique skills is recognized as an original contribution of major significance in the field. Having a diverse or unusual skillset does not equate to an “original contribution.” Rather, the record must be supported by evidence that the Beneficiary has already used those unique skills to make original contributions of major significance in the field. The documentation must show the widespread implementation of the Beneficiary’s work, that it has been seminal, or that it otherwise equates to an original contribution of major significance in the field.

Expert opinion letters can be helpful in demonstrating the significance of your contributions. However, not all letters are created equal. USCIS officers will only consider letters that specifically articulate how your contributions are of major significance to the field and its impact on subsequent work. Letters that lack specifics and simply use hyperbolic language will not be considered probative evidence.

• Although funded and published work may be “original,” this fact alone is not sufficient to establish that the work is of major significance. For example, peer-reviewed presentations at academic symposia or peer-reviewed articles in scholarly journals that have provoked widespread commentary or received notice from others working in the field, or entries (particularly a goodly number) in a citation index which cite the applicant’s work as authoritative in the field, may be probative of the significance of the alien’s contributions to the field of endeavor

One way to do this is by demonstrating that your work has been widely recognized and cited by others in the field. For example, peer-reviewed presentations at academic symposia or peer-reviewed articles in scholarly journals that have provoked widespread commentary or received notice from others working in the field may be probative evidence of the significance of an applicant’s contributions. In addition, entries in a citation index that cite an applicant’s work as authoritative in the field can also be probative evidence. A citation index is a database that tracks citations of scholarly works and can be used to demonstrate the impact and influence of an applicant’s work within their field.

• USCIS officers may also take into account the probative analysis that experts in the field provide in opinion letters regarding the significance of the applicant’s contributions in order to assist in giving an assessment of the original contributions of major significance. That said, not all expert letters provide such analysis.

To be considered probative evidence that may form the basis for meeting the O-1A criterion related to original contributions of major significance, the letter must include specific details about your Continue reading →

The O-1A visa is designed for individuals with extraordinary ability in the sciences, education, business, or athletics. To qualify for an O-1A visa, applicants must meet at least three criteria, one of which is evidence of the applicant’s participation, either individually or on a panel, as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization for which classification is sought. At the Zneimer & Zneimer, our experienced immigration attorneys in Chicago can help you navigate the O-1A visa application process and provide guidance on this specific criterion.

To meet this criterion, the applicant must have

• acted as a judge of the work of others in the same or an allied field of specialization.

The Chicago immigration attorneys at Zneimer & Zneimer can provide analysis regarding whether an O-1A petition is viable alternative to a person who was not selected for H-1B.  The O-1A is a very document-intensive petition and sometimes omission of available evidence may lead to denial.

For example, the Administrative Appeals Office recently published a decision affirming USCIS’s  denial for O-1 for a Cardiologist.  The AAO went even further by withdrawing USCIS’s finding that the physician met the criteria as a judge of the work of others.  The AAO determined that the USCIS made a mistake in finding that the Cardiologist met this criteria because while the Cardiologist demonstrated that journals have sent invitations for review, the documentation submitted to USCIS did not include evidence that the doctor actually did the reviews.

According to the AAO, the record did not contain sufficient documentary evidence demonstrating that the beneficiary met this criterion. The petitioner submitted invitations and articles authored by the beneficiary, but these did not establish that the beneficiary had reviewed journal submissions or acted as a judge of the work of others. The petitioner also asserted that the beneficiary had served as an instructor and been involved in projects improving medical care, but again, there was no detailed or corroborated information provided to support the claim that the beneficiary had participated as a judge of the work of others. In order to meet this criterion, a petitioner must show that the beneficiary has not only been invited to judge the work of others, but also that the applciant actually participated in the judging of the work of others in the same or allied field of specialization.