AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision AUG222017_01B2203

Peer‑review activity must be documented with verifiable volume, impact, and context; simple counts or screenshots are insufficient to satisfy the judging criterion. Verified, quantitative evidence of peer‑review activity that shows sustained national or international acclaim.; Contextual proof that

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID AUG222017_01B2203 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

  • high_salary

  • judging

  • original_contributions

  • scholarly_articles

Criteria Accepted

  • high_salary

  • scholarly_articles

Criteria Rejected

  • original_contributions

  • judging

Core Lesson

Peer‑review activity must be documented with verifiable volume, impact, and context; simple counts or screenshots are insufficient to satisfy the judging criterion.

Evidence Issue

  • Verified, quantitative evidence of peer‑review activity that shows sustained national or international acclaim.

  • Contextual proof that peer‑review work places petitioner among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

  • Original contributions of major significance.

  • Any major, internationally recognized award.

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.