AAO research
AAO EB-1A decision APR292020_05B2203
Simply performing limited judging duties or having modestly cited publications is not enough; applicants must provide clear, comparative evidence of the significance and top‑of‑field impact of those activities to satisfy EB‑1A criteria. Concrete evidence that judging roles were nationally/internatio
Decision Snapshot
Field Value --- --- Decision ID APR292020_05B2203 Decision date not stated in the extraction Outcome dismissed Field or occupation Not stated in the extracted decision plan. Final merits discussed Yes
Criteria Discussed
awards
judging
leading_critical_role
membership
original_contributions
published_material
scholarly_articles
Criteria Accepted
awards
leading_critical_role
scholarly_articles
Criteria Rejected
judging
membership
original_contributions
published_material
Core Lesson
Simply performing limited judging duties or having modestly cited publications is not enough; applicants must provide clear, comparative evidence of the significance and top‑of‑field impact of those activities to satisfy EB‑1A criteria.
Evidence Issue
Concrete evidence that judging roles were nationally/internationally acclaimed and placed petitioner among the small percentage at the top of the field.
Comparative analysis showing the petitioner’s publications have impact and citations exceeding those of peers.
Evidence of a major, internationally recognized award.
Demonstration of original contributions of major significance to the field.
Proof that membership reflects being at the very top of the profession.
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.