AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision NOV212011_01B2203: Director’s denial withdrawn; appeal sustained and petition approved. Review source…
Decision summary: AAO decision NOV212011_01B2203: Director’s denial withdrawn; appeal sustained and petition approved. Judging, original contributions of major significance, and scholarly authorship met; final merits favorable based on independent expert letters, citations, international recognition and continued work/prospective benefit.
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_EB1A_individual_decision. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | NOV212011_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | November 21, 2011 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A appeal decision (legacy format) |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Texas Service Center denial; AAO finds eligibility and sustains appeal. |
Operative disposition | Director’s denial withdrawn; appeal sustained and petition approved. |
Final-merits status | favorable_final_merits |
What the AAO decision addressed
Judging, original contributions of major significance, and scholarly authorship met; final merits favorable based on independent expert letters, citations, international recognition and continued work/prospective benefit.
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. 5 |
Original contributions of major significance | met — p. 5 |
Scholarly authorship | met — p. 6 |
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 holds and limits
"No source hold."
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: At filing petitioner was a glycobiology researcher; peer review, original contributions and scholarly authorship met.; pages: 5; 6
claim: More than 100 independent citations and expert letters corroborated contribution impact; final merits found sustained acclaim and approved petition.; pages: 5; 6; 7
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: in_scope_EB1A_individual_decision
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 1 — Cover sheet with date, AAO and petition classification.
PDF page 2 — Appeal posture; statutory framework and appeal sustained announced.
PDF page 6 — Scholarly articles met; final merits finds sustained acclaim/top-of-field evidence.
PDF page 7 — Concludes eligibility, continued work and prospective U.S. benefit; petition approved.
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
Final Merits research
Major Significance research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.