This case study is based on actual matters handled by Song Law Firm. To protect client confidentiality, all identifying information — including names, nationality, affiliations, and specific dates — has been anonymized and generalized. The narrative consolidates common patterns from multiple cases so that no single matter is identifiable, and certain facts have been altered for confidentiality. Song Law Firm makes no guarantee or promise of any particular outcome. This document is not advertising that promises results. Visa and immigration outcomes vary substantially based on USCIS review, facts, evidence, and policy changes; past results do not guarantee future outcomes. For specific legal advice, please consult an attorney directly.
Client Profile
Korean-American academic professionals with PhD degrees, including assistant/associate professors at U.S. research universities and senior researchers at research institutes. The client group held substantial records in publications, citations, peer review (acting as journal reviewers), conference presentations, awards, and professional society memberships. This pattern consolidates common profiles among academic excellence-based EB-1A cases handled by Song Law Firm.
Background
Compared to NIW, EB-1A requires a higher evidentiary bar — proof of extraordinary ability in the field. The client group sought EB-1A rather than NIW because their record sufficiently demonstrated extraordinary ability with international recognition, and because EB-1 priority dates were more favorable than EB-2 for green card timeline.
Legal Framework
The legal basis is INA § 203(b)(1)(A), and the regulatory standard is 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h). Adjudication follows the Kazarian two-step framework established in Kazarian v. USCIS, 596 F.3d 1115 (9th Cir. 2010).
Step 1 — Evidentiary review: meet at least 3 of the 10 criteria.
Step 2 — Final Merits Determination: holistic evaluation of whether the petitioner is among the small percentage at the top of the field with sustained national or international acclaim.
The 10 criteria include awards, memberships in associations requiring outstanding achievement, published material about the petitioner, judging the work of others, original contributions, scholarly articles, display of work, leading or critical roles, high salary, and commercial successes.
Song Law Firm Strategy
Song Law Firm applied a three-phase strategy.
First, mapping evidence to each of the 10 criteria. We aimed for substantive proof across 5–7 criteria rather than minimally meeting only 3.
Second, designing the Final Merits Determination narrative. We organized objective metrics — publication output, citation analysis (h-index, top citation counts), grant amounts, peer review record, awards — to substantiate “the top of the field.”
Third, securing expert opinion letters from internationally recognized authorities. Including senior scholars with no direct collaboration was critical.
Process and Timeline
Materials preparation took several months due to the volume of evidence required. The I-140 (EB-1A) petition was filed with USCIS, with Premium Processing utilized for many cases.
Outcome
The I-140 EB-1A petition received an Approval Notice (Form I-797) from USCIS. Because EB-1 priority dates were current or favorable in many quarters, subsequent steps were able to proceed promptly.
Key Takeaways
Whether to pursue EB-1A or NIW depends on the client’s evidence record. When records are sufficient, the EB-1A priority date advantage and self-petition benefits are substantial. The Final Merits Determination requires more than satisfying numeric thresholds — qualitatively demonstrating “the top of the field” is the determinative factor.
Consultation — Four Channels
📞 (201) 461-0031
✉ office@songlawfirm.com
🌐 songlawfirm.com/consultation/
📍 Parker Plaza, 400 Kelby St, 19th Floor, Fort Lee, NJ 07024
⚠ Notice
This case study is based on actual matters handled by Song Law Firm. To protect client confidentiality, all identifying information — including names, nationality, affiliations, and specific dates — has been anonymized and generalized. The narrative consolidates common patterns from multiple cases so that no single matter is identifiable, and certain facts have been altered for confidentiality.
Song Law Firm makes no guarantee or promise of any particular outcome, and this document is not advertising that promises results. Visa and immigration outcomes vary substantially based on USCIS review, facts, evidence, and policy changes; past results do not guarantee future outcomes. For specific immigration legal advice, please consult an attorney directly.
