AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision JUL102013_02B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed AAO finds judging and scholarly authorship met, but original contributions not met; only two criteria are established and no formal final-merits determination is reached.
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: Physical source concerns EB-1A extraordinary-ability Form I-140 or its motion; the motion posture is separately identified.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUL102013_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | July 10, 2013 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability (Form I-140) |
Procedural posture | Nonprecedent AAO appeal from Texas Service Center denial of EB-1A Form I-140; appeal dismissed at initial-evidence threshold. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | AAO finds judging and scholarly authorship met, but original contributions not met; only two criteria are established and no formal final-merits determination is reached. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO finds judging and scholarly authorship met, but original contributions not met; only two criteria are established and no formal final-merits determination is reached.
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 considered — source PDF |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not considered — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met — p. 4 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not considered — source PDF |
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: Petitioner is a mechanical engineer whose work concerns laser-assisted manufacturing and laser shock peening.; evidence_pages: 1; 2
claim: AAO accepts evidence of judging and scholarly authorship, but finds the asserted original contributions lack major significance.; evidence_pages: 4; 10; 11
claim: Because only two criteria are established, the appeal is dismissed without proceeding to final merits.; evidence_pages: 11
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible with caveats
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
Computing sector research
Threshold research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.