AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision FEB072007_02B2203: Membership

AAO EB-1A decision FEB072007_02B2203: Membership

EB-1A membership — AAO decision FEB072007_02B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.

Decision summary: AAO decision FEB072007_02B2203: Appeal dismissed. Sigma Xi membership, peer review, original contributions, scholarly articles and leading-role claims did not establish three criteria or sustained acclaim. (pp. 3–10).

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: in_scope_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.

Decision snapshot

Decision ID

FEB072007_02B2203

Decision date as printed

February 7, 2007

Classification / field stated in source

Sciences; research associate/postdoctoral materials scientist working on thin films, magnetic materials and sensor/recording applications

Procedural posture

Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial; AAO appellate review.

Operative disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Final-merits status

No separate Kazarian final-merits stage; closing review found talent but not sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing. (pp. 9–10)

What the AAO decision addressed

Appeal dismissed. Sigma Xi membership, peer review, original contributions, scholarly articles and leading-role claims did not establish three criteria or sustained acclaim. (pp. 3–10)

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 coded — source PDF

Membership

not met
Sigma Xi evidence lacked specific selection criteria; broad membership and uncertain election date did not show qualifying outstanding-achievement selection by experts. (pp. 3–4) — source PDF

Published material about the person

Not met — source PDF

Judging the work of others

not met
Manuscript review evidence did not set petitioner apart; unusually broad independent requests/editorial service were not shown. (pp. 4–5) — source PDF

Original contributions of major significance

Not met — source PDF

Scholarly authorship

Not met — source PDF

Artistic display or showcases

Not coded — source PDF

Leading or critical role

not met
Postdoctoral role at a distinguished laboratory did not establish leadership/critical impact for the institution. (pp. 9–10) — source PDF

High salary or remuneration

Not coded — source PDF

Commercial success in the performing arts

Not coded — source PDF

How this record may be used in research

Comparison scope: Source-cited researcher explainer can distinguish routine peer review and scholarly output from independently documented influence.

Page-level source trail

Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.

Open the official USCIS decision PDF. Page-specific citations were not available in the normalized row.

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

  • Membership research

  • Judging the work of others research

  • Leading or critical role research

  • Medicine sector research

  • Performance sector research

Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.

Primary source

Official USCIS AAO decision PDF for FEB072007_02B2203