AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision MAY092006_08B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision MAY092006_08B2203: Appeal dismissed. The petitioner did not establish the required three criteria; AAO dismisses the appeal.
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: Complete identity-matched AAO decision concerning EB-1A extraordinary-ability eligibility or the procedural review of such eligibility.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAY092006_08B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2006-05-09 |
Classification / field stated in source | research chemist at a university; EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition |
Procedural posture | Appeal from EB-1A denial; AAO reviews awards, membership, published material, judging, original contributions, scholarly authorship, leading role, and salary. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | The petitioner did not establish the required three criteria; AAO dismisses the appeal. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The petitioner did not establish the required three criteria; AAO dismisses the appeal.
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 | Not met — p. 3 |
Published material about the person | Not met — p. 4 |
Judging the work of others | Not met — p. 4 |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — p. 5 |
Scholarly authorship | met — p. 6 |
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: The petitioner is a research chemist; AAO reviews multiple claimed criteria.; pages: 1; 2
claim: Awards, membership, and published-material claims did not meet the regulatory criteria.; pages: 3; 4
claim: Evidence of reviewing manuscripts was insufficient to establish qualifying judging; original contributions did not show major significance.; pages: 4; 5
claim: AAO agrees the petitioner meets scholarly-authorship criterion but finds leading/critical role unestablished.; pages: 6; 7
claim: AAO concludes the petitioner did not satisfy the initial evidentiary threshold and dismisses.; pages: 7
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible for individual case discussion
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
Teaching sector research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.