AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision APR292020_06B2203

Citation counts must be contextualized and you must explicitly show how your work is original and significant; raw numbers or self‑cited counts alone will not satisfy the original contributions criterion. Independent citation analysis showing citations are unusually high for the field; Clear articul

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID APR292020_06B2203 Decision date not stated Outcome dismissed Field or occupation Not stated in the extracted decision plan. Final merits discussed No / not stated

Criteria Discussed

  • judging

  • original_contributions

  • scholarly_articles

Criteria Accepted

  • scholarly_articles

Criteria Rejected

  • original_contributions

Core Lesson

Citation counts must be contextualized and you must explicitly show how your work is original and significant; raw numbers or self‑cited counts alone will not satisfy the original contributions criterion.

Evidence Issue

  • Independent citation analysis showing citations are unusually high for the field

  • Clear articulation of the significance and impact of the cited work

  • Demonstration of original contributions beyond mere authorship

  • Sufficient detail on the number, scope, and influence of manuscript reviews for the judging criterion

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.