AAO research
EB-1A remand — AAO decision JUN302017_01B2203: Appeal sustained; petition approved. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision JUN302017_01B2203: Appeal sustained; petition approved. The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
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: in_scope_procedural_eb1a_decision. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUN302017_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2017-06-30 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: AAO de novo review; sustained appeal and found petitioner eligible; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; 4; classification: AAO de novo review; sustained appeal and found petitioner eligible; director_findings: See disposition basis; only facts stated in decision pages are summarized. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Appeal sustained; petition approved.', 'basis': 'AAO found at least three criteria met (judging, authorship, original contributions) and concluded final merits showed sustained acclaim; evidence included research citations, manuscripts, editorial experience, and commercialized veterinary diagnostic work.', 'citation_pages': [1, 2, 3, 4]} |
Final-merits status | AAO expressly found sustained national and international acclaim and extraordinary ability based on totality, including impact of research and diagnostic work. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
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 | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Membership | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | met — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: {'eligible_for_narrow_comparison': True, 'fit': 'Strong, narrow comparison candidate for veterinary/biomedical research and commercialization, but compare only with similar field and evidence profile.', 'caveats': 'Nonprecedent, fact-specific decision; no inference beyond cited record. A remand is not approval. Older criteria language predates current regulation/guidance; check legal temporal context before using in current-facing content.'}
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
Final Merits research
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.