AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision JUN252009_10B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision JUN252009_10B2203: Appeal dismissed. The AAO found no criterion established in its discussion of award, published material, judging, contributions, authorship and leading/critical role. A journal-review role was not adequately documented; letters did not independently demonstrate major field impact. (pp. 3–9).
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 | JUN252009_10B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | June 25, 2009 |
Classification / field stated in source | Sciences; electron-microscopy / microbeam-analysis researcher |
Procedural posture | Appeal of denial of an EB-1A petition; AAO appellate review. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed. |
Final-merits status | No formal final-merits determination is identified; fewer than three criteria were established and appeal dismissed. (pp. 9–10) |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO found no criterion established in its discussion of award, published material, judging, contributions, authorship and leading/critical role. A journal-review role was not adequately documented; letters did not independently demonstrate major field impact. (pp. 3–9)
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 |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | not met |
Judging the work of others | not met |
Original contributions of major significance | not met |
Scholarly authorship | not met |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | not met |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
Award eligibility and peer-review participation were not established; avoid converting submitted claims into recognized facts. (pp. 3–5)
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Good source-cited explainer candidate for the difference between citation-based scholarly impact and qualifying published material about a scientist.
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
Awards research
Published material about the person research
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Leading or critical role research
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.