AAO research
EB-1A appeal disposition — AAO decision MAY272020_14B2203: Appeal dismissed (physical p. 5). Review source status, procedural posture and the official…
Decision summary: AAO decision MAY272020_14B2203: Appeal dismissed (physical p. 5). Peer-review judging and scholarly authorship criteria were met; original contributions of major significance were not. Citation percentiles from broad clinical medicine and total-citation ranks did not establish specific field impact; cited studies used survey data but did not show major field advancement. Aggregate final-merits review was adverse (physical pp. 2–5).
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: in_scope_appeal_decision_final_merits. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAY272020_14B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | May 27, 2020 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A; orthodontist, researcher and educator; assistant professor at filing. |
Procedural posture | AAO de novo appeal from Nebraska Service Center denial. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed (physical p. 5). |
Final-merits status | Formal final-merits determination not required after fewer than three criteria, but AAO explicitly reviews aggregate evidence and finds it does not establish acclaim/top-of-field; peer review, editorial-board service and publication record were insufficient (physical p. 5). |
What the AAO decision addressed
Peer-review judging and scholarly authorship criteria were met; original contributions of major significance were not. Citation percentiles from broad clinical medicine and total-citation ranks did not establish specific field impact; cited studies used survey data but did not show major field advancement. Aggregate final-merits review was adverse (physical pp. 2–5).
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 — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | met — source PDF |
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
Citations use physical PDF page numbers; pages were read in source order.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Strong orthodontics/research comparison for differentiating scholarly authorship, peer reviewing, citation counts, and original contributions of major significance; note final aggregate discussion despite no formal final-merits step. Publish with distinct criterion-stage and aggregate-review treatment; ground citation comparisons in the cited field and timeframe.
Editorial use note: Publish with distinct criterion-stage and aggregate-review treatment; ground citation comparisons in the cited field and timeframe.
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
Medicine sector research
Teaching sector research
Major Significance research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.