AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision MAR252016_01B2203: Original contributions of major significance

EB-1A original contributions of major significance — AAO decision MAR252016_01B2203: Petition denied; certification decision concludes petitioner has not…

Decision summary: AAO decision MAR252016_01B2203: Petition denied; certification decision concludes petitioner has not shown extraordinary ability. The record does not show the self-published book or invention produced field-level impact, and evidence does not establish qualifying authorship or the required acclaim/recognition. Aggregate record fails; prospective work plan also lacks sufficient support.

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; verified in source review. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.

Decision snapshot

Decision ID	MAR252016_01B2203
Decision date as printed	March 25, 2016
Classification / field stated in source	EB-1A extraordinary ability; mathematics researcher/entrepreneur
Procedural posture	AAO certification decision following prior proceedings; reopens/reviews the matter and issues a denial.
Operative disposition	Petition denied; certification decision concludes petitioner has not shown extraordinary ability.
Final-merits status	"not met"

What the AAO decision addressed

The record does not show the self-published book or invention produced field-level impact, and evidence does not establish qualifying authorship or the required acclaim/recognition. Aggregate record fails; prospective work plan also lacks sufficient support.

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 The decision finds no independent evidence that the claimed book/invention made major-significance contributions in the field (pp. 2–4). — source PDF
Scholarly authorship	not met The self-published book is not shown to be scholarly authorship in qualifying professional/major trade publications or major media (p. 4). — source PDF
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

pp. 1–5; page-by-page notes below.

How this record may be used in research

Comparison scope: Potential comparison only for researcher/entrepreneur claims involving self-published books and invention assertions; it is an adverse certified decision, not a universal rule about self-publishing. eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations

Editorial use note: eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations

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
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Entrepreneurship sector research
Medicine sector research

Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.

Primary source

Official USCIS AAO decision PDF for MAR252016_01B2203