AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision DEC212005_17B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed AAO found the discussed awards, published material, original contributions, scholarly authorship, high salary, and leading/critical role insufficient; no three-criterion threshold or sustained acclaim was established.
Source reviewed: This page summarizes the specific AAO source and posture recorded in the completed source-review tracker. It does not turn a nonprecedent decision into a general rule.
Scope classification from review: Opening page identifies an EB-1A petition and final page confirms appeal disposition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | DEC212005_17B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | December 21, 2005 |
Classification / field stated in source | Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition under INA §203(b)(1)(A). |
Procedural posture | Appeal of EB-1A denial; dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | AAO found the record insufficient to show sustained acclaim/top-of-field status; because the initial criterion threshold was not met, it did not provide a distinct final-merits determination. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found the discussed awards, published material, original contributions, scholarly authorship, high salary, and leading/critical role insufficient; no three-criterion threshold or sustained acclaim was established.
Criterion-by-criterion status in this source
These labels reproduce the source-review record. “Not considered,” “not reached,” and “not coded” do not mean the criterion failed. A Director finding recited as background is not an AAO holding unless the decision says so.
Criterion | Source-review status |
|---|---|
Awards | |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | Not considered — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — p. 10 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The beneficiary worked as a principal scientist in semiconductor-laser research, including molecular-beam epitaxy and laser-diode development.; pages: 2; 3
claim: AAO found claimed awards/fellowships, press, original contributions, scholarly authorship, leading/critical role, and salary evidence insufficient.; pages: 3; 10
claim: Appeal dismissed.; pages: 11
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible with caveats
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
How to use this record
This is a historical, nonprecedent AAO decision about its own administrative record. It is not a prediction, success rate, or current filing instruction. Compare the issue and procedural stage before drawing an analogy. The current framework is in the USCIS Policy Manual, Volume 6, Part F, Chapter 2.
Related corpus research
Full-corpus research index
Awards research
Membership research
Published material about the person research
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Artistic display or showcases research
Leading or critical role research
High salary or remuneration research
Commercial success in the performing arts research
Computing sector research
Medicine sector research
Threshold research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.