AAO EB-1A decision APR142005_05B2203: science and published-material evidence pitfalls for eb-1a

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID APR142005_05B2203 Decision date not stated in the extraction Outcome dismissed Field or occupation science Final merits discussed Yes

Criteria Discussed

• awards

• high_salary

• leading_critical_role

• membership

• original_contributions

• published_material

• scholarly_articles

Criteria Accepted

Not stated in the extracted decision plan.

Criteria Rejected

• awards

• high_salary

• leading_critical_role

• membership

• original_contributions

• published_material

• scholarly_articles

Core Lesson

Petitioners must provide independent, verifiable evidence—such as major awards, comparative salary data, documented leading roles, significant professional memberships, and citations by independent experts—rather than relying on scholarships, self‑authored articles, or uncorroborated letters.

Evidence Issue

• corroborative evidence for awards

• comparative income data to support high salary claim

• documentation of a leading or critical role

• evidence of significance for professional memberships

• original scientific contributions of major significance

• published material about the alien (not self‑authored)

• independent, major citations of scholarly work

How This Connects

This decision is part of Extraordinary's AAO EB-1A corpus. It is exposed as a structured decision card so readers, search engines, and AI search systems can connect the decision to broader EB-1A evidence patterns.

Source Note

Non-precedent AAO decisions are used as evidence examples. They are not binding authority and do not predict any individual case.