AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision NOV232005_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed AAO found no qualifying one-time award or three criteria and dismissed 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: Cover and decision identify EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | NOV232005_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2005-11-23 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability in sciences/research |
Procedural posture | AAO appeal of denial; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | AAO rejected the initial evidence criteria; it provides overall acclaim commentary but no formal Kazarian final-merits determination. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found no qualifying one-time award or three criteria and dismissed 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 | |
Membership | Not met — p. 4 |
Published material about the person | Not met — p. 5 |
Judging the work of others | Not met — p. 5 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not met — p. 6 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not met — p. 7 |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — p. 8 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: Petitioner was a researcher associated with environmental/sustainability work; evidence included academic research, a grant/award, a doctoral committee service claim, publications, role claims, and salary evidence.; pages: 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8
claim: AAO found submitted awards/grants did not establish qualifying nationally recognized prizes for excellence; membership and judging evidence lacked outstanding-achievement selection or qualifying field relevance.; pages: 3; 4; 5
claim: Original-contribution and authorship claims lacked reliable field-wide impact and qualifying publication evidence; leadership claims did not establish a distinguished organization or critical role.; pages: 5; 6; 7
claim: The record did not establish high salary relative to comparable workers or sustained acclaim; appeal dismissed.; pages: 7; 8
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
Medicine sector research
Teaching sector research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.