AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision AUG112020_01B2203: mechanical engineering and eb‑1a original contributions criterion guide

When seeking EB‑1A approval under the original contributions criterion, petitioners must provide independent evidence that their work has a major, field‑wide impact beyond their own organization; internal citations, employer‑centric letters, or modest citation counts are insufficient. clear demonstr

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID AUG112020_01B2203 Decision date not stated in the extraction Outcome dismissed Field or occupation mechanical engineering Final merits discussed No / not stated

Criteria Discussed

  • judging

  • original_contributions

  • scholarly_articles

Criteria Accepted

  • judging

Criteria Rejected

  • original_contributions

  • scholarly_articles

Core Lesson

When seeking EB‑1A approval under the original contributions criterion, petitioners must provide independent evidence that their work has a major, field‑wide impact beyond their own organization; internal citations, employer‑centric letters, or modest citation counts are insufficient.

Evidence Issue

  • clear demonstration that the petitioner’s contributions are of major significance to the field

  • evidence that the impact extends beyond the petitioner’s own employer or research group

  • independent, third‑party validation of national or international acclaim

  • satisfaction of at least three of the ten EB‑1A criteria

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.