AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision JUN202005_09B2203: Appeal dismissed; prior denial affirmed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed; prior denial affirmed AAO rejected the claimed awards, membership, published material, judging, original contributions, scholarly authorship, and leading/critical role; threshold unmet.
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: Opening page identifies EB-1A classification and final page confirms disposition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUN202005_09B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | June 20, 2005 |
Classification / field stated in source | Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition under INA §203(b)(1)(A). |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Vermont Service Center denial; dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed; prior denial affirmed |
Final-merits status | The record did not establish three criteria; AAO concluded the researcher had not shown sustained acclaim or standing at the top of the field. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO rejected the claimed awards, membership, published material, judging, original contributions, scholarly authorship, and leading/critical role; threshold unmet.
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 | |
Published material about the person | Not met — p. 4 |
Judging the work of others | |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
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: Petitioner sought EB-1A as a biomedical/orthopedic researcher; at filing he was a postdoctoral fellow/research associate at University of Rochester.; pages: 2
claim: The national TULES award was insufficient to show sustained acclaim; review/judging, cited work, contributions, authorship, and role evidence were also found insufficient.; pages: 3; 9
claim: Appeal dismissed.; pages: 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
Medicine sector research
Threshold research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.