explaining that once a petitioner submits the required evidence, USCIS determines whether that evidence demonstrates both “a level of expertise indicating that the individual is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the[ir] field of endeavor” and “sustained national or international acclaim” (citation and internal quotation marks)
How later courts described this case
- explaining that once a petitioner submits the required evidence, USCIS determines whether that evidence demonstrates both “a level of expertise indicating that the individual is one of that small percentage who have risen to the very top of the[ir] field of endeavor” and “sustained national or international acclaim” (citation and internal quotation marks)
- concluding that plaintiff had failed to establish qualification for EB-1 classification, in part, where letters from experts stated that they had “formed a good opinion” of plaintiffs research and his work was “of the caliber that one would expect from a young professor at a strong research-oriented university”
- holding that neither USCIS nor its Administrative Appeals Office may unilaterally impose substantive requirements for visa eligibility beyond those set forth in the relevant governing regulations
- finding error in conclusion that without evidence of other scholars’ citation to petitioner’s scholarly works, petitioner had not satisfied evidentiary criterion at 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3)(vi)
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
*1123 PREGERSON, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I am pleased to concur in Judge Nelson’s opinion. I write separately, however, to emphasize the injustice perpetrated by our immigration laws and system in this case. Dr. Poghos Kazarian received his Ph.D. in the field of theoretical physics from Yerevan State University and, since arriving in the United States, has continued to research and teach in this challenging field. Starting around 2000, Dr. Kazarian participated in a research group headed by Dr. Kip Thorne at the California Institute of Technology. Dr. Thorne, among others, submitted a letter in support of Dr. Kazarian’s visa application. Dr. Kazarian volunteers his teaching services at Glendale Community College and has authored and published his own physics textbook. Dr. Kazarian has received strong words of praise from colleagues at Yerevan State University, Glendale Community College, and the California Institute of Technology. Dr. Kazarian’s contributions in the United States have been undoubtedly valuable. Forcing Dr. Kazarian to depart from our country would be undoubtedly wasteful and make one think that there is something haywire in our system. Although, as the opinion points out, Dr. Kazarian did not submit three of the types of evidence required for the “extraordinary visa,” he would have been an excellent candidate for an “exceptional ability” visa. Indeed, it was likely the error of an ineffective lawyer that led Kazarian to apply for the wrong visa in the first place. 1
. At oral argument, Dr. Kazarian’s current counsel represented to the court that the attorney who started Dr. Kazarian on the path of applying for this "extraordinary ability” visa was George Verdin. Verdin is listed as being indefinitely suspended from practice before the Immigration Service, the Immigration Courts, and the Board of Immigration Appeals. Executive Office for Immigration Review, Office of General Counsel, List of Currently Disciplined Practitioners (Aug. 11, 2009), http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/profcond/ chart.htm. Verdin has also been disbarred by the Supreme Court of Hawai'i. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Verdin, No. 22349 (Haw. Sept. 27, 2001). It is distressing how many good people — including the highly educated and the minimally educated — fall prey to disreputable lawyers known to the immigration system.