AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision OCT022006_01B2203: Awards

EB-1A awards — AAO decision OCT022006_01B2203: Appeal dismissed (p. 5). Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.

Decision summary: AAO decision OCT022006_01B2203: Appeal dismissed (p. 5). Record did not establish sustained acclaim. Claimed awards were educational/fellowship or nomination without national recognition; associations lacked outstanding-achievement entry requirements; panel participation/judging largely postdated filing or lacked proof; one salary figure lacked comparator evidence (pp. 3–5).

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; verified in source review. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.

Decision snapshot

Decision ID	OCT022006_01B2203
Decision date as printed	October 2, 2006
Classification / field stated in source	EB-1A extraordinary ability; academic/researcher in operations and supply-chain management (pp. 2–5).
Procedural posture	Appeal of Texas Service Center denial; AAO reviewed multiple claimed regulatory criteria (pp. 2–5).
Operative disposition	Appeal dismissed (p. 5).
Final-merits status	Not coded in the normalized review fields

What the AAO decision addressed

Record did not establish sustained acclaim. Claimed awards were educational/fellowship or nomination without national recognition; associations lacked outstanding-achievement entry requirements; panel participation/judging largely postdated filing or lacked proof; one salary figure lacked comparator evidence (pp. 3–5).

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 ISM educational-program certificate, Plossl fellowship, and junior-faculty nomination lacked evidence of qualifying nationally/internationally recognized excellence awards (p. 3). — source PDF
Membership	not met ISM, IBM Developer Research Panel and IBM Scholars Program did not require outstanding achievement; panel participation began after filing (p. 3). — source PDF
Published material about the person	Not coded — source PDF
Judging the work of others	not met Most documented reviews postdated filing; other claimed reviews lacked corroborating records (p. 4). — source PDF
Original contributions of major significance	Not coded — source PDF
Scholarly authorship	not met Record contained at most one qualifying article and did not show required sustained acclaim; authorship/major-media evidentiary gaps (p. 4). — source PDF
Artistic display or showcases	Not coded — source PDF
Leading or critical role	Not coded — source PDF
High salary or remuneration	Not met — source PDF
Commercial success in the performing arts	Not coded — source PDF

Source holds and limits

"No source completeness issue. Some initial scanned cover has redactions; decision reasoning remains legible."

Source-cited findings recorded in review

p1: AAO cover, date, Texas Service Center; redacted identifiers.; p2: Appeal posture and field/denial basis.; p3: Award and association-membership analysis.; p4: Judging and publication evidence/timing.; p5: Leading role and salary analysis; totality and order dismissing appeal.

How this record may be used in research

Comparison scope: Useful for a narrowly defined academic/operations-research case cluster: timing at filing, ordinary professional memberships, peer review, and salary comparisons. Not a generic EB-1A “researcher denied” example without criterion-specific caveats. Eligible for single-case summary and curated comparison page on academic/researcher evidence; retain filing-date distinctions.

Editorial use note: Eligible for single-case summary and curated comparison page on academic/researcher evidence; retain filing-date distinctions.

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
Judging the work of others research
Scholarly authorship research
Entrepreneurship sector research
Medicine sector research
Performance sector research
Teaching sector research

Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.

Primary source

Official USCIS AAO decision PDF for OCT022006_01B2203