AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision MAY302018_02B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision MAY302018_02B2203: Appeal dismissed. AAO rejects award, membership, published-material and original-contribution evidence; accepts scholarly authorship and reviewing service. The petitioner does not meet three criteria; final-merits step is not required, and aggregate acclaim is insufficient.
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; verified in source review. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAY302018_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | May 30, 2018 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A; chemical-sciences researcher |
Procedural posture | Appeal from Nebraska Service Center denial; new evidence submitted on appeal. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed. |
Final-merits status | "not met" |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO rejects award, membership, published-material and original-contribution evidence; accepts scholarly authorship and reviewing service. The petitioner does not meet three criteria; final-merits step is not required, and aggregate acclaim is insufficient.
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 |
Membership | not met |
Published material about the person | not met |
Judging the work of others | met |
Original contributions of major significance | not met |
Scholarly authorship | met |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | not met |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
pp. 1–5; each criterion basis includes pinpoint page citations.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Researcher example for distinguishing article authorship and manuscript reviewing from major-significance contributions, qualifying awards, membership, media coverage and critical roles. eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations
Editorial use note: eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 2 — Criteria claimed; award evidence and translation issue.
PDF page 4 — Published material and judging; original-contribution evidence begins.
PDF page 5 — Contribution, authorship and role findings; threshold/final merits and dismissal.
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
Leading or critical role research
Medicine sector research
Coverage research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.