Good news — this case cleared the first bar
The AAO reversed the Director's finding on the published material criterion (iii), finding the petitioner met at least three criteria, and remanded for a final merits determination under the Kazarian framework.
Next step: a full merits review weighing all the evidence together.
The petitioner, a Chinese entrepreneur, sought EB-1A classification but was denied by the Nebraska Service Center, which found only two of the required three evidentiary criteria satisfied (judging and scholarly articles). On appeal, the AAO reversed the Director's finding on the published material criterion, concluding that press coverage of the petitioner's corporate activities in multiple Chinese publications — supported by third-party evidence including a Wall Street Journal reference — was sufficient. The AAO also found the Director had misapplied Braga v. Poulos by treating concrete circulation data as mere self-serving assertions. With three criteria now met, the AAO remanded for a full final merits determination under the Kazarian two-step framework, while reserving judgment on whether the petitioner also met the original contribution criterion.
What worked: Evidence of press coverage of the petitioner's corporate business activities across multiple Chinese publications, supported by concrete circulation data and a third-party Wall Street Journal reference establishing at least one publication's major status, was enough to satisfy the published material criterion and push the total criteria met to the required three.
What failed: Articles about the petitioner's fiction writing were not considered relevant to his stated field of extraordinary ability (business/entrepreneurship). Additionally, the record initially lacked sufficient third-party corroboration of publication significance, requiring supplemental evidence on RFE response.
Takeaway: When claiming published material in major media, always supplement publication-supplied circulation figures with independent third-party evidence (e.g., references in recognized outlets) to preempt arguments that the data is self-serving. Ensure all submitted articles clearly relate to the field of extraordinary ability claimed, not ancillary personal projects.
Cases like this are frequently used by attorneys when responding to RFEs or building initial petitions. The evidence patterns that worked (or failed) here directly reflect what USCIS officers look for when evaluating EB-1A criteria.
● Evidence that moved the needle
- Evidence of press coverage of the petitioner's corporate business activities across multiple Chinese publications, supported by concrete circulation data and a third-party Wall Street Journal reference establishing at least one publication's major status, was enough to satisfy the published material criterion and push the total criteria met to the required three.
● Evidence that wasn't enough alone
- Articles about the petitioner's fiction writing were not considered relevant to his stated field of extraordinary ability (business/entrepreneurship)
- Additionally, the record initially lacked sufficient third-party corroboration of publication significance, requiring supplemental evidence on RFE response.
Criterion-by-criterion breakdown
Published material about the person
Reversed in their favorDirector found criterion not met; AAO reversed, finding press coverage of petitioner's corporate work in publications such as 21st Century Business Herald, China News Service, and others was sufficient. AAO distinguished Braga v. Poulos, noting that circulation data provided was concrete, not merely self-serving, and that the Director overlooked third-party evidence such as a Wall Street Journal article about one publication.
Judging the work of others
MetBoth Director and AAO agreed this criterion was satisfied.
Original contributions of major significance
Not metPetitioner claimed this criterion but AAO reserved judgment as it was unnecessary to the outcome after finding three criteria met.
Authorship of scholarly articles
MetBoth Director and AAO agreed this criterion was satisfied.
Articles from 21st Century Business Herald, China News Service, China Enterprise News, Xinmin Weekly, The Morning Express, Southern Metropolis Daily, Nan Fang Daily Press, and Technology Entrepreneurship about petitioner's corporate work
Wall Street Journal article about the 21st Century Business Herald establishing it as a major publication
Circulation data submitted for several publications
Evidence of participation as a judge of others' work (criterion iv)
Evidence of authorship of scholarly articles (criterion vi)
Articles about petitioner's fiction writing career were not considered work in his field of extraordinary ability (business/entrepreneurship)
China Youth Daily 2016 article and 2015 China News Service article about his novel were insufficient on their own as they related to fiction writing rather than business
Director overlooked third-party evidence establishing major media status of publications (e.g., Wall Street Journal article about 21st Century Business Herald) when concluding no evidence of major media was in the record.
Director misapplied Braga v. Poulos by equating detailed circulation data with the type of unsupported self-serving assertions found in that case, where the petitioner merely claimed to be the '#1 Magazine of Mixed Martial Arts' without supporting data.
Completed
I-140 filed
Entrepreneur engaged in business and corporate ventures, with some fiction writing
Completed
Nebraska Service Center — Denied
Initial decision: Denied.
Completed
Appeal to the AAO
Petitioner appealed to the Administrative Appeals Office for de novo review.
2024-08-23
AAO decision — Remanded
The AAO reversed the Director's finding on the published material criterion (iii), finding the petitioner met at least three criteria, and remanded for a final merits determination under the Kazarian framework.
If you're appealing a similar decision, I-290B must be filed within 30 days of personal service of the denial, or 33 days if mailed.
Find this useful? A coffee helps keep Case Reviewer free and ad-free.
Buy me a coffee