AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision MAY242005_01B2203: approved. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision MAY242005_01B2203: approved. The AAO found judging, original contributions, and scholarly authorship and concluded the record showed overall acclaim under the legacy framework.
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: Source is an AAO EB-1A extraordinary-ability appellate decision.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAY242005_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | May 24, 2005 (filename date; cover date is faint) |
Classification / field stated in source | Legacy EB-1A appellate decision (petitioner name redacted) |
Procedural posture | Appeal sustained; petition approved. |
Operative disposition | approved |
Final-merits status | Favorable legacy overall-acclaim determination and approval; decision predates the modern Kazarian two-step terminology. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO found judging, original contributions, and scholarly authorship and concluded the record showed overall acclaim under the legacy framework.
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 | met — p. 3 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | |
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
claim: The record documented peer review and grant evaluation, scholarly articles and substantial research in composite materials / applied mechanics.; pages: 3; 4
claim: The AAO credited theoretical methods, polymerization/scatterer work and simulation techniques as original contributions with broader significance, supported by citation and expert evidence.; pages: 4; 5; 6
claim: The AAO found overall acclaim and sustained the appeal, approving the petition under the legacy analysis.; pages: 6; 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.
PDF page 1 — Caption; date text on cover is faint; filename gives May 24, 2005.
PDF page 4 — Research methods and technical contribution evidence.
PDF page 5 — Citation, implementation / significance, and expert evidence reviewed.
PDF page 6 — Totality / overall acclaim favorable conclusion.
PDF page 7 — Appeal sustained and petition approved; final order.
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
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.