AAO research
EB-1A membership — AAO decision FEB082013_01B2203: AAO dismissed the appeal and the petition remained denied. Review source status, procedural posture and…
Decision summary: AAO decision FEB082013_01B2203: AAO dismissed the appeal and the petition remained denied. The AAO found the antecedent three-category requirement unsatisfied; it also said aggregate evidence did not show the required level of expertise (pp. 14).
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 | FEB082013_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | February 8, 2013 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A petition in a science/research field, filed by a graduate researcher; specific specialty is redacted in the source (pp. 2, 13). |
Procedural posture | Nebraska Service Center denial appealed; AAO dismissed; petitioner submitted an appellate statement without new documentary evidence (p. 2, 14). |
Operative disposition | AAO dismissed the appeal and the petition remained denied. |
Final-merits status | No distinct final-merits analysis was required because the initial evidence threshold was not met; decision says aggregate record did not indicate required expertise (p. 14). |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO found the antecedent three-category requirement unsatisfied; it also said aggregate evidence did not show the required level of expertise (pp. 14).
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 — source PDF |
Membership | not met |
Published material about the person | not met |
Judging the work of others | not met |
Original contributions of major significance | not met |
Scholarly authorship | not met |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | abandoned |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
No source hold. Specialty and personal identifiers are redacted; do not infer the exact scientific discipline.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: A source-linked guide can separate publications, research contributions, and leadership roles and explain why evidence for a team is not automatically evidence for the institution (pp. 9-13).
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
Published material about the person research
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Leading or critical role research
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.