AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision MAY092012_01B2203: Appeal dismissed; AAO concluded fewer than three criteria were established. (pp. 2, 11–12). Review source…
Decision summary: AAO decision MAY092012_01B2203: Appeal dismissed; AAO concluded fewer than three criteria were established. (pp. 2, 11–12). Awards: not considered/abandoned on appeal. Published material: Director’s favorable finding withdrawn; article/citation evidence did not satisfy the criterion (pp. 4–6). Original contributions: not met; research/letters did not establish that work was already of major significance (pp. 7–10). Scholarly authorship: met (p. 8). Display: not met; research-conference presentations are not artistic exhibitions (p. 8). Leading/critical role: met for petitioner’s college role (p. 8). High salary: not met; teaching salary did not demonstrate high remuneration in biotechnology research (p. 10).
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 | MAY092012_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | May 9, 2012 |
Classification / field stated in source | Biotechnology researcher petitioning for extraordinary ability in the sciences; self-represented appeal. |
Procedural posture | Biotechnology researcher petitioning for extraordinary ability in the sciences; self-represented appeal. Appeal dismissed; AAO concluded fewer than three criteria were established. (pp. 2, 11–12) |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed; AAO concluded fewer than three criteria were established. (pp. 2, 11–12) |
Final-merits status | Not reached because the initial three-criterion threshold was not met. (pp. 11–12) |
What the AAO decision addressed
Awards: not considered/abandoned on appeal. Published material: Director’s favorable finding withdrawn; article/citation evidence did not satisfy the criterion (pp. 4–6). Original contributions: not met; research/letters did not establish that work was already of major significance (pp. 7–10). Scholarly authorship: met (p. 8). Display: not met; research-conference presentations are not artistic exhibitions (p. 8). Leading/critical role: met for petitioner’s college role (p. 8). High salary: not met; teaching salary did not demonstrate high remuneration in biotechnology research (p. 10).
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 | abandoned |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | not met |
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 | met |
High salary or remuneration | not met |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
Hold for case-level review; adverse, non-precedent, and older regulatory analysis.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: If later published, use a source-cited, decision-specific summary with procedural posture, only source-supported criterion states, page references, and a direct USCIS PDF link. Do not present a non-precedent outcome as a general rule. Biotechnology-research example concerning citations, research impact, scholarly publications, conference presentations, and occupation-specific salary comparison.
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
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.