AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision DEC272005_04B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed The AAO rejected the asserted awards, published material, judging, original-contribution, authorship, leading-role, and salary evidence; the initial threshold was not met.
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: Complete printed AAO Form I-140 EB-1A source; identity and posture confirmed on opening page(s).. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | DEC272005_04B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | December 27, 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 | Fewer than three criteria were established; the AAO did not reach formal final merits. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO rejected the asserted awards, published material, judging, original-contribution, authorship, leading-role, and salary evidence; the initial threshold was not met.
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 | Not met — p. 3 |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not met — p. 4 |
Judging the work of others | Not met — p. 4 |
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. 7 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner was an industrial engineer and academic who relied on awards, media coverage, judging, contributions, scholarly authorship, leadership, and compensation.; pages: 1; 2; 3
claim: The AAO found the evidence insufficient under the asserted criteria, including because the record did not establish field-level significance, major media coverage, or a distinguished organization/critical role.; pages: 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9
claim: The AAO concluded the petitioner had not established eligibility and dismissed the appeal.; pages: 9
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
Teaching sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.