AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision JAN092019_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed Only judging and scholarly authorship were established; the record did not meet three criteria or establish sustained acclaim.
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 face identifies an AAO decision on a Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition. Field, posture, and final-merits distinctions are preserved in the source-grounded findings.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JAN092019_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | January 9, 2019 |
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; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | The AAO expressly states it need not provide the formal final-merits determination because the three-criterion threshold was not met; it nevertheless reviews the record in the aggregate and finds acclaim/top-of-field standing unsupported. |
What the AAO decision addressed
Only judging and scholarly authorship were established; the record did not meet three criteria or establish sustained acclaim.
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 — p. 4 |
Membership | Not met — p. 5 |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | met — p. 3 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | met — p. 8 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not met — p. 8 |
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: At filing the petitioner worked as a visiting fellow and senior research scholar in environmental science/sustainability; the decision describes work on social aspects of science and technology in sustainable agriculture, renewable energy, climate change, and health innovation.; pages: 1; 2
claim: The AAO affirmed the Director’s finding that peer review of manuscripts for several journals met judging; the petitioner also met scholarly authorship based on articles in named environmental, agricultural, policy, and biotechnology journals.; pages: 3; 8
claim: Student awards and a postdoctoral fellowship/research grants did not qualify as nationally or internationally recognized prizes; claimed association memberships lacked outstanding-achievement requirements or proof of membership by the May 10, 2017 filing date.; pages: 4; 5
claim: SciDev.Net coverage was not established as major media; citations and letters did not demonstrate original contributions of major significance; the claimed leading/critical roles lacked sufficient evidence of the petitioner’s role and organizational reputation.; pages: 5; 6; 7; 8
claim: The appeal failed the three-criterion threshold; the AAO gave an aggregate acclaim discussion but said a formal Kazarian final-merits determination was unnecessary.; pages: 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.
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
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.