AAO research
EB-1A appeal disposition — AAO decision JUL192005_03B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision JUL192005_03B2203: Appeal dismissed. Six scholarly articles were documented, but only two had 13 combined citations and the most recent cited article was from 1998; AAO found no sustained acclaim or evidence placing her at the top of the field. (pp. 3–7).
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: in_scope_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUL192005_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | July 19, 2005 |
Classification / field stated in source | Biomedical science; female researcher in rab-protein, prostate-cancer and HIV-1 research |
Procedural posture | Appeal of California Service Center denial; dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed. |
Final-merits status | No separate formal final-merits determination identified; aggregate record found no sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing. (p. 7) |
What the AAO decision addressed
Six scholarly articles were documented, but only two had 13 combined citations and the most recent cited article was from 1998; AAO found no sustained acclaim or evidence placing her at the top of the field. (pp. 3–7)
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 coded — source PDF |
Membership | Not met — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not met — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not coded — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | met — source PDF |
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-cited findings recorded in review
(p. 3)
(p. 4)
(pp. 5–6)
(pp. 6–7)
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Useful biomedical research comparator on authorship satisfying a criterion while recency, independent citation/recognition and broader acclaim remain distinct. Individual page; distinguish criterion-level authorship from absence of field-level impact.
Editorial use note: Individual page; distinguish criterion-level authorship from absence of field-level impact.
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
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.