AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision JAN142020_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision JAN142020_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Two criteria were met (judging and scholarly authorship); published material and original contributions were not established, so the three-criterion threshold was unmet. (pp. 2–10).
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 | JAN142020_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | January 14, 2020 |
Classification / field stated in source | Nonprecedent EB-1A petition in medicine; petitioner was an obstetrics and gynecology physician/researcher. (pp. 1–2) |
Procedural posture | Appeal from Texas Service Center denial; AAO dismissed. (pp. 1, 11) |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed. |
Final-merits status | AAO stated that a separate Kazarian final-merits determination was unnecessary because the petitioner did not meet three criteria; it nevertheless reviewed the record in aggregate and found acclaim/top-of-field standing unestablished. (pp. 10–11) |
What the AAO decision addressed
Two criteria were met (judging and scholarly authorship); published material and original contributions were not established, so the three-criterion threshold was unmet. (pp. 2–10)
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 met — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not met — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met |
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.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: If editorially cleared, create a source-linked summary that identifies posture and disposition, separates threshold-stage criteria from any aggregate/final-merits reasoning, and includes page-specific PDF citations. Narrow medical-research comparison on judging/authorship versus evidence of field impact; nonprecedent and record-specific.
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
Judging the work of others research
Scholarly authorship research
Medicine sector research
Threshold research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.