AAO research
EB-1A scholarly authorship — AAO decision JAN122011_01B2203: AAO dismissed the appeal or affirmed the denial; the petition remained denied. (last page…
Decision summary: AAO decision JAN122011_01B2203: AAO dismissed the appeal or affirmed the denial; the petition remained denied. (last page; see posture and outcome citations). AAO found that one discovery was supported as an original contribution of major significance, but did not find sufficient initial criteria/overall acclaim; the motion did not change the denial. (pp. 13-16).
Source limitation: The review record contains a source hold or limitation. Read the limitation below before relying on any case detail; unresolved facts are not treated as findings.
Scope classification from review: in_scope_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JAN122011_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | January 12, 2011 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A sciences petition by a research physicist whose work included magnetic tunnel junctions and data storage. (pp. 2, 5, 11-13) |
Procedural posture | AAO granted motion to reopen/reconsider but affirmed its November 4, 2009 decision dismissing the appeal; petition remained denied. (pp. 2, 16) |
Operative disposition | AAO dismissed the appeal or affirmed the denial; the petition remained denied. (last page; see posture and outcome citations) |
Final-merits status | Reached in aggregate and not met; despite recognizing one important discovery, AAO found the total record did not establish top-of-field standing. (pp. 14-15) |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found that one discovery was supported as an original contribution of major significance, but did not find sufficient initial criteria/overall acclaim; the motion did not change the denial. (pp. 13-16)
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 — source PDF |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not coded — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not coded — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — source PDF |
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 holds and limits
No identity/completeness hold. Critical posture caveat: motion granted procedurally, but earlier dismissal and petition denial affirmed. Do not imply the motion resulted in approval.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Potential case page on motion posture and how evidence of one notable research contribution was weighed alongside awards and overall acclaim.
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
Open the official USCIS decision PDF. Page-specific citations were not available in the normalized row.
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
Scholarly authorship research
Medicine sector research
Major Significance research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.