AAO research
EB-1A original contributions of major significance — AAO decision JUL292014_01B2203: Appeal sustained; petition approved (pp. 2, 7). Review source status…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUL292014_01B2203: Appeal sustained; petition approved (pp. 2, 7). AAO found three regulatory categories met: judging work of others, original contributions of major significance, and scholarly authorship. It then found sustained acclaim/top-of-field based on extensive documented research accomplishments, peer review, citation and recognition evidence, and concluded continued-work/benefit requirements were met (pp. 5–7).
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; verified in source review. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUL292014_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | July 29, 2014 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability in sciences; petitioner is a physicist/researcher (pp. 2–3). |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Texas Service Center denial; petitioner claimed multiple criteria; AAO applied two-step review including final merits (pp. 2–6). |
Operative disposition | Appeal sustained; petition approved (pp. 2, 7). |
Final-merits status | Not coded in the normalized review fields |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found three regulatory categories met: judging work of others, original contributions of major significance, and scholarly authorship. It then found sustained acclaim/top-of-field based on extensive documented research accomplishments, peer review, citation and recognition evidence, and concluded continued-work/benefit requirements were met (pp. 5–7).
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 coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not coded — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | met |
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 holds and limits
"Extensive redactions; use only the occupation and findings expressly visible; older decision context."
Source-cited findings recorded in review
p1: Redacted cover; printed July 29, 2014.; p2: Appeal sustained announced; EB-1A classification and record background.; p3: Regulatory criteria and legal framework.; p4: AAO applies plain-language standards; discusses evidence and prior court treatment.; p5: Judging criterion and original contributions; decision explains standard.; p6: Three criteria summary and final-merits analysis.; p7: Conclusion: continued-work/prospective benefit and approval order.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Strong research approval and criterion-interpretation source: judging need not separately be caused by acclaim; final merits still evaluates the totality. Eligible for a detailed historical case summary, clearly dated and cited.
Editorial use note: Eligible for a detailed historical case summary, clearly dated and cited.
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 2 — Appeal sustained announced; EB-1A classification and record background.
PDF page 4 — AAO applies plain-language standards; discusses evidence and prior court treatment.
PDF page 5 — Judging criterion and original contributions; decision explains standard.
PDF page 6 — Three criteria summary and final-merits analysis.
PDF page 7 — Conclusion: continued-work/prospective benefit and approval order.
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
Original contributions of major significance research
Medicine sector research
Final Merits research
Major Significance research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.