AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision NOV212019_04B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision NOV212019_04B2203: Appeal dismissed. The evidence and letters did not establish three criteria; publication/citation counts lacked comparative impact evidence, and the record did not show the role’s place in the company hierarchy or sufficiently significant field contributions. (pp. 2–9).
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 | NOV212019_04B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | November 21, 2019 |
Classification / field stated in source | Sciences/materials science; engineer and researcher |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Texas Service Center denial; AAO appellate review. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed. |
Final-merits status | No formal final-merits determination; AAO found threshold criteria insufficient. (p. 9) |
What the AAO decision addressed
The evidence and letters did not establish three criteria; publication/citation counts lacked comparative impact evidence, and the record did not show the role’s place in the company hierarchy or sufficiently significant field contributions. (pp. 2–9)
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 | not met |
Original contributions of major significance | not met |
Scholarly authorship | not 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 holds and limits
Do not report raw article/publication counts as accepted evidence of field-wide influence; decision found comparative and impact evidence deficient. (pp. 3–9)
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Potential cited answer on why publication counts and support letters do not by themselves establish major research impact.
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
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Leading or critical role research
Computing sector research
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.