AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision JAN082019_01B2203: Judging the work of others

EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision JAN082019_01B2203: dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.

Decision summary: AAO decision JAN082019_01B2203: dismissed. Judging and scholarly authorship were met, but original contributions were not; the three-criterion threshold failed. No formal final-merits determination.

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	JAN082019_01B2203
Decision date as printed	Jan. 8, 2019
Classification / field stated in source	EB-1A appellate decision, Matter of S-T-V-
Procedural posture	Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial; dismissed.
Operative disposition	dismissed
Final-merits status	The initial-evidence threshold failed. The AAO made a brief aggregate observation but did not conduct formal final merits.

What the AAO decision addressed

Judging and scholarly authorship were met, but original contributions were not; the three-criterion threshold failed. No formal final-merits determination.

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 — p. 2
Original contributions of major significance	Not met — p. 3, p. 4, p. 5, p. 6
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 AAO affirmed judging and scholarly authorship, but found that original contributions of major significance were not established; fewer than three criteria were met.; pages: 2; 3; 6
claim: Citation counts did not show field-wide impact without contextual evidence; research on omega-3 recommendations had not yet been shared by filing, and hepatitis A/GIS and rotavirus/HIV work lacked proof of broad implementation or major field effect.; pages: 3; 4; 5; 6
claim: The AAO dismissed and stated it need not fully address final merits, while noting that the aggregate record did not show the required acclaim.; pages: 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
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Medicine sector research
Threshold research
Final Merits research

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

Primary source

Official USCIS AAO decision PDF for JAN082019_01B2203