AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision NOV292007_03B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed AAO found judging and scholarly authorship met; it found other discussed criteria unmet and separately concluded the total record did not show sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing.
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: Opening page identifies an EB-1A petition and final page confirms appeal disposition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | NOV292007_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | November 29, 2007 |
Classification / field stated in source | Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition under INA §203(b)(1)(A). |
Procedural posture | Appeal of EB-1A denial; dismissed after final-merits review. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | AAO expressly evaluated the aggregate evidence and found it did not establish sustained acclaim or standing among the small percentage at the top of the field. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found judging and scholarly authorship met; it found other discussed criteria unmet and separately concluded the total record did not show sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing.
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 — p. 3 |
Membership | Not met — p. 4 |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | met — p. 5 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | met — p. 13 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — p. 3 |
Leading or critical role | |
High salary or remuneration | Not considered — p. 3 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — p. 3 |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner sought EB-1A classification as a nephrologist and medical researcher.; pages: 1; 2
claim: AAO found judging and scholarly authorship met but awards, membership, published material, original contributions, and leading/critical role unmet.; pages: 3; 13
claim: AAO conducted final-merits review and dismissed the appeal.; pages: 13; 14
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible with caveats
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
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.