AAO research
EB-1A membership — AAO decision MAY272009_01B2203: AAO dismissed the appeal or affirmed the denial; the petition remained denied. (last page; see posture…
Decision summary: AAO decision MAY272009_01B2203: AAO dismissed the appeal or affirmed the denial; the petition remained denied. (last page; see posture and outcome citations). AAO found the record did not establish sustained acclaim at the very top of the petitioner’s field; it also found the evidence insufficient in the aggregate. (p. 14).
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 | MAY272009_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | May 27, 2009 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A petition in sciences/business by a technology executive and research engineer specializing in IT and business development; at filing he was a visiting scholar and outside director/consultant. (pp. 2-3) |
Procedural posture | Appeal from Nebraska Service Center denial; AAO dismissed. (pp. 2, 14) |
Operative disposition | AAO dismissed the appeal or affirmed the denial; the petition remained denied. (last page; see posture and outcome citations) |
Final-merits status | Reached in aggregate and not met; the decision says the record did not establish sustained acclaim or the very top of the field. (p. 14) |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found the record did not establish sustained acclaim at the very top of the petitioner's field; it also found the evidence insufficient in the aggregate. (p. 14)
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 — source PDF |
Membership | not met |
Published material about the person | Not met — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | not met |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | not met |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not coded — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
No identity/completeness hold. Privacy-redacted historical decision; do not expose redacted identity or present as binding precedent.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: A cited case page could show the difference between an executive's stated compensation/assets and documented remuneration compared with peers.
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
Membership research
Judging the work of others research
Scholarly authorship research
Entrepreneurship sector research
Computing sector research
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.