AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision FEB212007_01B2203: Appeal sustained; petition approved. Review source status, procedural posture and the…
Decision summary: AAO decision FEB212007_01B2203: Appeal sustained; petition approved. AAO finds original contributions of major significance and scholarly authorship, along with other criterion evidence, establish three criteria and sustained acclaim. Totality supports extraordinary ability and future U.S. benefit.
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; verified in source review. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | FEB212007_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | February 21, 2007 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A; electrical/microwave engineer |
Procedural posture | Appeal from California Service Center denial. |
Operative disposition | Appeal sustained; petition approved. |
Final-merits status | "met" |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO finds original contributions of major significance and scholarly authorship, along with other criterion evidence, establish three criteria and sustained acclaim. Totality supports extraordinary ability and future U.S. benefit.
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 coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not coded — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met |
Original contributions of major significance | met |
Scholarly authorship | met |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not coded — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
pp. 1–6; each criterion basis includes pinpoint page citations.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Positive engineering decision for content on patents, practical use, independent expert recognition, scholarly authorship and totality. Check claim-specific technical details against source before editorial publication. eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations
Editorial use note: eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 3 — Judging/service and original contribution evidence; expert letters.
PDF page 4 — Independent evidence linking technology to use and field impact.
PDF page 5 — Major significance, scholarly authorship, three criteria, totality and approval.
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
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Computing sector research
Major Significance research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.