Peer Review
Repeated selection to judge the work of others.
EB1A does not establish a fixed citation minimum. Researchers with modest citation counts may still have strong evidence of peer review, original contributions, critical roles, awards, published material, patents, adoption or other recognition. The case should be built around what the complete record actually demonstrates.
Repeated selection to judge the work of others.
Outside use of methods, findings, software or technology.
Important responsibility for a distinguished organization.
Applied innovation with documented downstream impact.
Citation evidence can matter. Dismissing it does not explain why other evidence better demonstrates the applicant's recognition.
Use field context and strong noncitation evidence to demonstrate professional recognition and impact.
There is no fixed regulatory minimum.
Potentially, depending on the complete evidence.
Peer review can satisfy a separate criterion when properly documented, but the complete record must still satisfy final merits.
Potentially, particularly where impact is demonstrated through implementation, patents, adoption or other evidence.