AAO research
AAO EB-1A decision AUG272021_01B2203: technology / engineering (patent holder) and eb‑1a appeal strategy pitfalls (abandoning criteria, new evidence)
If you don’t contest a denial on appeal, the AAO will not review that criterion, potentially leaving gaps in your case. No evidence of major awards or recognitions; Insufficient documentation of original, groundbreaking contributions; No contested record on high salary or leading/critical role, so A
Decision Snapshot
Field Value --- --- Decision ID AUG272021_01B2203 Decision date 2021-08-27 Outcome sustained Field or occupation technology / engineering (patent holder) Final merits discussed Yes
Criteria Discussed
awards
commercial_success
high_salary
leading_critical_role
original_contributions
published_material
scholarly_articles
Criteria Accepted
commercial_success
published_material
scholarly_articles
Criteria Rejected
awards
original_contributions
leading_critical_role
high_salary
Core Lesson
If you don’t contest a denial on appeal, the AAO will not review that criterion, potentially leaving gaps in your case.
Evidence Issue
No evidence of major awards or recognitions
Insufficient documentation of original, groundbreaking contributions
No contested record on high salary or leading/critical role, so AAO did not review those 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.