AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision MAY272020_03B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed AAO found no sustained acclaim/top-of-field showing at final merits and dismissed 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 motion review of such eligibility.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAY272020_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2020-05-27 |
Classification / field stated in source | veterinarian and animal-welfare specialist; EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition |
Procedural posture | Appeal from denial of EB-1A petition; Director found scholarly authorship and leading role, plus judging; AAO rejects judging and conducts final-merits review as stated in the decision. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | AAO found no sustained acclaim/top-of-field showing at final merits and dismissed the appeal. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found no sustained acclaim/top-of-field showing at final merits and dismissed 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 considered — source PDF |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not considered — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | |
Original contributions of major significance | Not considered — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | met — p. 2 |
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 worked in animal welfare and sought to continue that work in the United States; Director found scholarly-authorship and leading-role criteria.; pages: 1; 2
claim: AAO disagrees that appointment to an official committee established judging; it also reviews claimed animal-welfare law contributions and role.; pages: 2; 3; 4; 5
claim: At final merits, AAO finds the record does not establish sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing.; pages: 3; 4; 5; 6
claim: Appeal dismissed.; pages: 6
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
Public Service sector research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.