AAO research
EB-1A membership — AAO decision JUL152013_02B2203: Appeal dismissed; petition denied. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed; petition denied The AAO’s printed procedural discussion, eligibility analysis and operative order; see cited pages.
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: Source is an AAO decision concerning an EB-1A Form I-140 petition or motion related to that petition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUL152013_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | July 15, 2013 |
Classification / field stated in source | AAO decision concerning a Form I-140 petition for EB-1A classification under INA § 203(b)(1)(A). |
Procedural posture | AAO nonprecedent appeal from denial of an EB-1A petition; the petitioner described work spanning water treatment, medical projects, lighting and food composition. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed; petition denied |
Final-merits status | The AAO found the antecedent three-criterion threshold unmet and dismissed without a separate final-merits determination. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO’s printed procedural discussion, eligibility analysis and operative order; see cited pages.
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 | abandoned — p. 4 |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not met — p. 13 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not met — p. 14 |
Leading or critical role | |
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 decision is labeled nonprecedent and concerns a biological engineer/product designer’s EB-1A petition.; evidence_pages: 1; 2; 17
claim: The AAO rejected published-material, judging, original-contribution, scholarly-article, display and leading-role evidence; it treated membership as abandoned.; evidence_pages: 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 13; 14; 15
claim: The appeal was dismissed because the petitioner did not establish the required criteria.; evidence_pages: 15; 16; 17
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
Medicine sector research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.