AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision AUG122005_17B2203

Scholarships, research grants, and routine peer‑review work do not satisfy the EB‑1A awards or judging criteria; petitioners must provide clear evidence of a major recognized award and demonstrable judging of others’ work. Evidence of a major internationally recognized award; Demonstration that peti

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID AUG122005_17B2203 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

Not stated in the extracted decision plan.

Criteria Rejected

  • awards

  • judging

  • leading_critical_role

  • membership

  • original_contributions

  • published_material

  • scholarly_articles

Core Lesson

Scholarships, research grants, and routine peer‑review work do not satisfy the EB‑1A awards or judging criteria; petitioners must provide clear evidence of a major recognized award and demonstrable judging of others’ work.

Evidence Issue

  • Evidence of a major internationally recognized award

  • Demonstration that petitioner performed a judging role of others' work

  • Proof that petitioner held a leading or critical role in a distinguished organization

  • Concrete evidence of sustained national or international acclaim for original contributions

  • Citations that directly reference the petitioner’s work

  • Publications of major significance rather than routine articles

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.