AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision JUL122005_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision JUL122005_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. The AAO rejected awards, membership, judging, contribution, and role claims and found the record did not establish extraordinary ability.
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: Complete printed AAO Form I-140 EB-1A source; identity and posture confirmed on opening page(s).. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUL122005_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | July 12, 2005 |
Classification / field stated in source | Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition under INA §203(b)(1)(A). |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Nebraska Service Center EB-1A denial; dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | The AAO found fewer than three criteria and did not conduct a formal final-merits determination. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO rejected awards, membership, judging, contribution, and role claims and found the record did not establish extraordinary ability.
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. 3 |
Membership | Not met — p. 3 |
Published material about the person | Not considered — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not considered — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not met — p. 9 |
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: The petitioner was an electrical engineer and presented evidence involving awards, IEEE membership, judging technical papers, original contributions, and a leading/critical role.; pages: 1; 2; 3; 4
claim: The AAO found university recognition insufficient as awards, IEEE membership criteria insufficient, routine peer review insufficient for judging, and the research-impact and role evidence inadequate.; pages: 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9
claim: The AAO concluded that the petitioner did not establish at least three criteria or sustained acclaim and dismissed the appeal.; pages: 9; 10
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
Final Merits research
Waiv research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.