AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision FEB242016_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed The petitioner established judging and scholarly authorship, but not a third criterion: the record did not show original contributions of major significance or a leading/critical role at the internship, university department, or employer. The threshold was therefore unmet.
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: The PDF identifies this as an AAO Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability decision under INA §203(b)(1)(A).. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | FEB242016_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | February 24, 2016 |
Classification / field stated in source | Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability decision under INA §203(b)(1)(A). |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial of Form I-140; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | The AAO expressly says it need not provide a formal final-merits determination because the petitioner met only two initial criteria; its aggregate review is described separately. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The petitioner established judging and scholarly authorship, but not a third criterion: the record did not show original contributions of major significance or a leading/critical role at the internship, university department, or employer. The threshold was therefore unmet.
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 considered — source PDF |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not considered — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met — p. 2 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | met — p. 2 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | |
High salary or remuneration | Not considered — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner is an engineer specializing in materials research and product development, with MS and PhD training and R&D employment at a wood-plastic-composite manufacturer.; pages: 1; 2
claim: The AAO accepted judging and scholarly authorship as satisfied, leaving the question whether a third criterion was met.; pages: 2; 3
claim: Letters described research on refractory ceramics and materials, but did not document field-wide impact; planned or limited industrial applications, citations and an asserted award were insufficiently corroborated.; pages: 3; 4; 5; 6; 7
claim: An internship, graduate-student roles, and R&D employment did not establish a leading or critical role for the relevant organizations.; pages: 7; 8
claim: The AAO stated it need not provide a formal final-merits determination, then dismissed the appeal.; pages: 8; 9
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible for individual case discussion
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 1 — Opening page visually inspected; date, identity, classification and posture checked.
PDF page 9 — Final physical page visually inspected; conclusion and operative order checked.
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.