AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision JUN132005_26B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed The AAO affirmed the denial, finding no qualifying awards, membership, published material, judging, original contributions, or scholarly authorship by the filing date; it found the petitioner a talented postdoctoral researcher but not eligible.
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: The source is a Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability decision.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUN132005_26B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | June 13, 2005 |
Classification / field stated in source | Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability decision under INA §203(b)(1)(A). |
Procedural posture | Appeal of California Service Center denial of Form I-140; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | Legacy 2005 decision with an overall eligibility/acclaim assessment, not a distinct modern final-merits stage. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO affirmed the denial, finding no qualifying awards, membership, published material, judging, original contributions, or scholarly authorship by the filing date; it found the petitioner a talented postdoctoral researcher but not eligible.
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 met — p. 4 |
Judging the work of others | Not met — p. 4 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | |
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
claim: The petitioner sought classification as a plant molecular and cell biology researcher and was a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Connecticut Health Center at filing.; pages: 2; 8
claim: Student awards and an internal postdoctoral fellowship did not establish nationally or internationally recognized prizes for sustained acclaim.; pages: 3
claim: The American Society of Plant Biologists and American Society for Cell Biology membership materials did not show outstanding achievement as a membership condition.; pages: 3
claim: Submitted profiles/interviews were post-filing or unsupported; limited translated articles/citations did not show sustained major-media coverage about the petitioner.; pages: 4
claim: Judging activity was described as one post-filing review, award selection, and regional science-fair judging and could not establish eligibility at filing.; pages: 4
claim: Letters described ROP GTPase and actin-related research, but the evidence did not show field-wide influence or major significance; authorship evidence likewise did not establish acclaim or sufficient impact by filing.; pages: 5; 6; 7
claim: The AAO concluded that the record showed a talented and productive postdoctoral researcher with potential, but did not establish extraordinary ability at filing; appeal dismissed.; pages: 8
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible for individual case discussion
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
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.