AAO research
EB-1A membership — AAO decision OCT022009_01B2203: AAO dismissed the appeal or affirmed the denial; the petition remained denied. (last page; see posture…
Decision summary: AAO decision OCT022009_01B2203: AAO dismissed the appeal or affirmed the denial; the petition remained denied. (last page; see posture and outcome citations). AAO accepted scholarly authorship but rejected the other analyzed categories and concluded the record did not establish sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing. (pp. 7-14).
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_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | OCT022009_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | October 2, 2009 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A sciences petition for a research associate/postdoctoral researcher working in molecular biology, including hepatitis B and alcohol-related liver disease. (pp. 2-3, 10-14) |
Procedural posture | Appeal from Nebraska Service Center denial; AAO dismissed. (pp. 1-2, 14) |
Operative disposition | AAO dismissed the appeal or affirmed the denial; the petition remained denied. (last page; see posture and outcome citations) |
Final-merits status | AAO concluded the evidence did not establish sustained national/international acclaim or that the petitioner was among the small percentage at the top of the field. (p. 14) |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO accepted scholarly authorship but rejected the other analyzed categories and concluded the record did not establish sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing. (pp. 7-14)
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 — source PDF |
Membership | not met |
Published material about the person | Not met — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | not met |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | met |
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 identity/completeness hold. Historical privacy-redacted decision; ensure public summaries do not disclose redacted names or overstate its legal effect.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: A source-linked research case page can distinguish the authorship criterion from the separate major-significance inquiry, with page-level citations.
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
Membership research
Judging the work of others research
Scholarly authorship research
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.