continued

The successful appeal of the research scientist in organic synthesis hinged on the strongly worded specific letters from three members of the National Academy of Sciences. But it also included a publication and citation history and evidence that the petitioner’s work was noted in two publications within the field. The service center worried that the publications did not list the petitioner by name, and that the petitioner was not the first author on the accompanying article. However, in sustaining the appeal, the AAO found this concern unwarranted, given that this was a NIW case and not a case where the extraordinary ability standard need be applied:



Considering the classification sought and the record as a whole we do not find this concern warranted in this particular case. First, the petitioner need not demonstrate acclaim [in an NIW case]. Thus, the mere fact that Chemical and Engineering News does not use the petitioner’s name is not disqualifying. Second, while the petitioner is not the first author listed on the Nature Structural Biology article, both [witnesses] attest to the importance of the petitioner’s work on the project.