What USCIS Actually Looks for in an EB-1A Petition

EB-1A approval fell to 60.65% in FY2024 — its lowest rate in over a decade — while denials climbed to 23.32%, according to USCIS administrative data compiled by immigration law researchers. [Source: Powell Immigration Law / USCIS Data, Jan 2025] For professionals planning a petition in 2025 or 2026, understanding exactly what drives approvals — and what drives RFEs and denials — is the most important preparation you can do before retaining an attorney.

The "Extraordinary Ability" Standard Is Not What It Sounds Like

The phrase "extraordinary ability" suggests an impossibly high bar. USCIS defines it differently: a level of expertise indicating that the person is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of their field. The operative word is small percentage, not best in the world. An ML engineer with a strong publication record, speaking credits at NeurIPS or ICML, and documented judging roles at significant events almost certainly qualifies. So does a product design leader whose work has been featured in Wired, who has keynoted a major design conference, and who commands a salary in the 95th percentile for their role.

The Ten Criteria — Why Three Is the Floor, Not the Goal

Under 8 CFR 204.5(h)(3), a petition must satisfy at least three of the following ten regulatory criteria: (1) nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards for excellence; (2) membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements, as judged by experts; (3) published material in professional or major media; (4) participation as a judge of others' work; (5) original scientific or scholarly contributions of major significance; (6) authorship of scholarly articles in professional journals; (7) display of work at exhibitions; (8) critical or essential role at distinguished organizations; (9) high salary relative to peers; and (10) commercial success in the performing arts.

Meeting three criteria with thin evidence is a recipe for an RFE or denial. The FY2024 decline in approvals correlates strongly with an increase in petitions filed with the minimum viable evidence stack — often by professionals who underestimated how seriously USCIS scrutinizes each exhibit. Petitions that succeed tend to satisfy four or five criteria and provide redundant, corroborating evidence within each criterion rather than the minimum required to technically meet the threshold.

The Criteria Most Professionals Overlook

Two criteria are consistently underused by private-sector professionals despite being highly accessible: the judging criterion (4) and the high salary criterion (9). Judging is accessible because many senior professionals can qualify for hackathon, grant review, or startup competition panels without the profile required for Forbes coverage. Salary is accessible because top-quartile compensation in major tech markets often significantly exceeds BLS averages for "software developers" — the comparison group most adjudicators will default to without a better-constructed benchmark. Read our full guide to the salary criterion →

The Final Merits Determination: The Test Most Petitions Fail

Even after satisfying three criteria, USCIS conducts what the courts call a "final merits determination" — a holistic assessment of whether the totality of evidence demonstrates that you are among the small percentage at the very top of your field. This two-step framework was established in Kazarian v. USCIS (9th Cir. 2010) and remains binding.

"Meeting the evidentiary criteria does not automatically establish eligibility for the benefit sought. The officer must then make a final merits determination that the totality of the evidence demonstrates the petitioner's claim." — Matter of Dhanasar (AAO 2016)

In practice, this means a petition where the only media coverage is a quote in a local tech blog, the only judging credit is an internal company hackathon, and the only award is an employee-of-the-month certificate may technically clear three criteria while failing the final merits test. The standard is not a checkbox — it is a persuasion exercise.

What "Compelling" Evidence Looks Like in Practice

For the published materials criterion, a quote buried in a round-up article mentioning you among fifteen others is technically a published mention. A 600-word profile in Forbes — which receives 77.4 million website visits per month according to Semrush (February 2026) — that opens with your name in the headline and describes your contribution as industry-significant is compelling. [Source: Semrush, Forbes.com Traffic Overview, Feb 2026]

For the judging criterion, a certificate from a mid-tier event is technical. A letter from the organizer of a major hackathon — explaining that you were selected from 300 nominated experts, that your feedback influenced prize decisions on $500,000 in awards, and that fewer than 1% of nominees were invited — is compelling. See the full judging criterion guide →

Annotation Is Not Optional

Every exhibit in your petition should be accompanied by a brief annotation: what the publication or event is, why it matters in your field, what its audience size or prestige level is, and why your appearance in it signals recognition rather than routine participation. Adjudicators cannot independently research every outlet, event, or organization you reference. A Forbes article without annotation of Forbes' reach and prestige is evaluated by an adjudicator who may or may not recognize the brand — and who is not required to give it benefit of the doubt.

How the Filing Volume Trend Affects Your Case

EB-1A petitions received by USCIS grew from approximately 25,892 in FY2022 to 36,978 in FY2023 — a 43% increase in a single year. [Source: Tryalma / USCIS Data, 2025] The annual EB-1 cap of approximately 40,040 visas (28.6% of the 140,000 employment-based annual limit) was exhausted in both FY2024 and FY2025. [Source: Ogletree, FY2025 EB-1 Cap Exhaustion Report] This means rising filing volumes and a fixed cap create structural pressure on approval rates that is independent of individual petition quality. Filing a strong petition faster — rather than waiting to accumulate more evidence — has become a more material strategic consideration than it was three years ago.