Judging the Work of Others

Wang Chen (Owen Wong) has repeatedly served as a judge and evaluator of the work of others within the field of fashion design, sustainable product development, and professional training.

His judging activities were conducted by invitation, involved independent professional judgment, and occurred across government-affiliated programs, enterprise-level assessment systems, and academic or professional evaluation contexts.

These activities demonstrate peer recognition of expertise and satisfy the EB-1A criterion requiring evidence of judging the work of others.

The petitioner’s judging roles share the following characteristics:

• Independent and non-subordinate:
  The individuals and projects evaluated were not his employees or subordinates.
• Professional and outcome-determinative:
  His evaluations affected selection, certification, approval, or advancement outcomes.
• Invited and selective:
  Participation was based on recognized expertise rather than open enrollment or routine teaching.
• Repeated over time:
  Judging activities occurred across multiple years and institutional contexts.

Wang Chen was formally invited to serve as an evaluation expert for government-affiliated public programs supporting vocational development and employment initiatives.

In this capacity, he evaluated:

• Project proposals and implementation plans
• Design feasibility and functional suitability
• Sustainability and long-term applicability of submitted work

His role required professional judgment that directly influenced program selection, project approval, and resource allocation, rather than ceremonial participation.

This constitutes formal judging of the work of others within a public, government-associated framework.

Wang Chen served as an external professional assessor within enterprise-level training and certification systems adopted by apparel companies.

His responsibilities included:

• Designing standardized evaluation criteria
• Reviewing written examinations and applied assessments
• Determining certification or qualification outcomes

The individuals evaluated were independent professionals or trainees, and assessment results were used for:

• Role qualification
• Professional differentiation
• Promotion or incentive mechanisms

These activities reflect industry-level judging, rather than instruction or mentoring.

Wang Chen has also been invited to participate in academic or quasi-academic review contexts, evaluating student or participant work from an applied industry perspective.

His evaluations focused on:

• Professional relevance
• Market feasibility
• Design logic and application standards

Such reviews required independent judgment and were conducted within established institutional frameworks that engage external professionals to assess work quality.

The petitioner’s judging activities are distinct from routine teaching, coaching, or internal supervision, in that:

• He was not evaluating his own employees or direct reports
• Evaluation outcomes were formally recorded and consequential
• Participation was based on external invitation and recognized expertise

This distinction is critical under EB-1A adjudication standards.

Wang Chen’s judging activities were:

• Conducted across multiple organizations and platforms
• Repeated over several years
• Applied to diverse categories of work, including design projects, professional assessments, and applied program evaluations

This pattern demonstrates sustained reliance on his judgment, rather than isolated or incidental involvement.

Based on the evidence presented, Wang Chen has repeatedly participated as a judge of the work of others in his field of expertise, satisfying the requirements of 8 CFR §204.5(h)(3)(iv).

His invited, independent, and outcome-determinative evaluation roles demonstrate professional standing and peer recognition consistent with extraordinary ability.