AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision FEB272017_01B2203: Judging the work of others

EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision FEB272017_01B2203: dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.

Decision summary: AAO decision FEB272017_01B2203: dismissed. Judging and scholarly authorship were accepted by the Director; original contributions of major significance were not established. Initial threshold failed; no formal final merits.

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: Source is an AAO EB-1A extraordinary-ability appellate decision.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.

Decision snapshot

Decision ID	FEB272017_01B2203
Decision date as printed	Feb. 27, 2017
Classification / field stated in source	EB-1A appellate decision, Matter of Y-L-
Procedural posture	Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial; dismissed.
Operative disposition	dismissed
Final-merits status	Two criteria remained established; contribution claim failed and the threshold was not reached. Aggregate observations are not a formal FMD.

What the AAO decision addressed

Judging and scholarly authorship were accepted by the Director; original contributions of major significance were not established. Initial threshold failed; no formal final merits.

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 — p. 3
Membership	Not coded — source PDF
Published material about the person	Not coded — source PDF
Judging the work of others	met — p. 3
Original contributions of major significance	Not met — p. 3, p. 4, p. 5
Scholarly authorship	met — p. 6
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

claim: The Director had accepted judging and scholarly authorship; the AAO found original contributions not established and stated the petitioner did not meet three criteria.; pages: 2; 3; 6
claim: Citation reports, percentile rankings, self-citations, and recommendation letters did not establish that mathematical research had already influenced the field at a major level.; pages: 3; 4; 5
claim: The petitioner did not contest the Director’s adverse awards finding; the AAO did not re-adjudicate that criterion. It dismissed without formal final merits, while reviewing the record in aggregate.; pages: 3; 6

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.

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
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Medicine sector research
Teaching sector research
Threshold research
Final Merits research
Major Significance research

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

Primary source

Official USCIS AAO decision PDF for FEB272017_01B2203