AAO research
EB-1A original contributions of major significance — AAO decision JUN202011_01B2203: Appeal dismissed; denial grounds considered independent and…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUN202011_01B2203: Appeal dismissed; denial grounds considered independent and alternative (p. 18). Scholarly authorship met the plain-language criterion, but the aggregate record—including contributions, career stage, comparative accomplishments, and salary—did not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing (pp. 13-18).
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_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUN202011_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | June 20, 2011 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A science petition by a research scientist/postdoctoral researcher in biochemistry (pp. 5, 17-18). |
Procedural posture | Texas Service Center denial appealed; AAO dismissed (pp. 2, 18). |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed; denial grounds considered independent and alternative (p. 18). |
Final-merits status | Formal final-merits determination conducted and adverse; the record did not distinguish petitioner from field peers at the required level (pp. 15-18). |
What the AAO decision addressed
Scholarly authorship met the plain-language criterion, but the aggregate record—including contributions, career stage, comparative accomplishments, and salary—did not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing (pp. 13-18).
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 | Not coded — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | not met |
Scholarly authorship | met |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | not met |
High salary or remuneration | not met |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
No source integrity hold. Redacted; do not imply a universal citation threshold or that authorship alone guarantees eligibility.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Case-linked explainer can show why authorship and citations are considered separately from major significance and acclaim; preserve the record’s specific evidence and comparison group.
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
Open the official USCIS decision PDF. Page-specific citations were not available in the normalized row.
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
Scholarly authorship research
Leading or critical role research
High salary or remuneration research
Medicine sector research
Major Significance research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.