AAO research
EB-1A membership — AAO decision JUL102009_01B2203: Appeal dismissed (p. 16). Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision JUL102009_01B2203: Appeal dismissed (p. 16). AAO found the record insufficient under the criteria and overall; authorship appears to have been one category with a Director finding that AAO withdrew. It did not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing (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 | JUL102009_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | July 10, 2009 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A science petition (research-science field; exact specialty should be quoted only from complete opening text) (pp. 2-3). |
Procedural posture | Nebraska Service Center denial appealed; AAO dismissed (pp. 2, 16). |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed (p. 16). |
Final-merits status | Adverse appeal outcome and overall acclaim conclusion (pp. 15-16); treat separate final-merits status as unclear unless the dedicated discussion is confirmed. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found the record insufficient under the criteria and overall; authorship appears to have been one category with a Director finding that AAO withdrew. It did not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing (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 | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Membership | not met |
Published material about the person | not met |
Judging the work of others | unclear |
Original contributions of major significance | not met |
Scholarly authorship | unclear |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | not met |
High salary or remuneration | not met |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
No identity/completeness hold. Specialty and some criterion conclusion details remain unconfirmed in text review; do not publish those assertions without verification.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Potential explainer about what each evidence type must establish in a science petition; source citations needed before publishing granular criterion claims.
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
Membership research
Published material about the person research
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Leading or critical role research
High salary or remuneration research
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.