What are the eligibility criteria and approval statistics for the EB‑1 'extraordinary ability' immigrant visa from 2000–2005?
Executive summary
The EB‑1 “extraordinary ability” (EB‑1A/E11) immigrant visa requires applicants to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and a level of achievement placing them among “that small percentage” at the top of their field, and it permits self‑petitioning without a U.S. employer so long as the applicant intends to continue work in their field and will prospectively benefit the United States [1] [2] [3]. Available reporting in the provided sources describes the regulatory eligibility framework—meeting a one‑time major prize or at least three of ten regulatory criteria plus a final merits determination [1] [4] [5]—but does not contain agency‑published EB‑1A approval statistics specifically for the years 2000–2005, so firm numeric approval rates for that period cannot be confirmed from these sources [6].
1. The legal threshold: “sustained national or international acclaim” and its regulatory form
Statutory and regulatory language frames EB‑1A eligibility: the Immigration and Nationality Act authorizes immigrant visas for aliens of extraordinary ability demonstrated by “sustained national or international acclaim,” and the implementing regulation defines that ability as a level of expertise placing the individual among a small percentage at the top of their field [7] [1]. Practically, USCIS and Department of State guidance require extensive documentation of acclaim and recognition in sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics, and applicants must show intent to continue working in that field upon U.S. entry [2] [3].
2. The evidentiary routes: major prize or three of ten criteria plus merits review
Regulations and practitioner guides describe two principal paths: proof of a one‑time major international prize (e.g., Pulitzer, Nobel, Oscars cited by many practitioners as examples) or satisfying at least three of ten enumerated criteria—such as published material about the applicant, original contributions of major significance, authorship of scholarly articles, judging others’ work, or high salary relative to peers—followed by USCIS’s discretionary merits determination [1] [4] [8]. USCIS policy implements a two‑step analysis (threshold/criteria then final merits) that gives adjudicators room to weigh evidence holistically, a point emphasized in legal commentary and firm guidance [5] [9].
3. Process mechanics and practical advantages emphasized by sources
Applicants file Form I‑140 as the petitioning vehicle—EB‑1A uniquely allows self‑petitioning without labor certification—and approved I‑140s enable adjustment to lawful permanent residence subject to visa availability and other eligibility; premium processing applies to I‑140 adjudications in many practitioner accounts [3] [5] [10]. Department of State materials and practitioner pages underline that EB‑1 recipients need not have a specific U.S. job offer so long as they continue to work in their field in the U.S., which is a distinctive procedural advantage within employment‑based categories [2] [1].
4. Approval statistics: what the reporting does and does not provide for 2000–2005
Several secondary sources discuss approval‑rate trends and comparisons across EB‑1 subcategories, noting that EB‑1A historically shows lower approval rates than EB‑1B and EB‑1C because of its higher evidentiary bar; one summary references rising RFEs and tighter adjudications in later years [6] [11]. However, none of the provided sources publish specific USCIS or Department of State approval counts or percentages for the EB‑1A subcategory covering fiscal years 2000–2005, and a practitioner blog that references 2005–2010 trends does not supply the raw 2000–2005 data in the materials provided here [4] [6]. Therefore, precise approval rates, grant counts, or denial statistics for 2000–2005 cannot be asserted from these sources.
5. Sources, interpretive caveats and where to confirm historic approval numbers
The analysis above relies on USCIS and Department of State descriptions of eligibility and practitioner/legal summaries of evidentiary standards and adjudicative practice [3] [2] [1] [5]. For definitive historic approval statistics from 2000–2005, the appropriate primary records would be USCIS historical adjudication tables and Department of State immigrant visa issuance reports for those fiscal years—documents not included among the supplied sources—so readers seeking exact numeric rates should consult those agency archives directly (p1_s11 notes approval‑rate analysis but does not provide the targeted 2000–2005 dataset).