AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision OCT112007_06B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed The AAO found the discussed criteria unmet and concluded the petitioner had not established eligibility under the extraordinary-ability classification.
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: The source is an AAO decision on an EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | OCT112007_06B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | October 11, 2007 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability (Form I-140) |
Procedural posture | AAO appeal of denial of an EB-1A Form I-140; petition filed November 3, 2004; nonprecedent decision. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | The threshold of three criteria was not met; the decision states an aggregate conclusion but does not conduct a distinct formal final-merits step. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO found the discussed criteria unmet and concluded the petitioner had not established eligibility under the extraordinary-ability classification.
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 | |
Published material about the person | Not met — p. 6 |
Judging the work of others | Not met — p. 6 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not met — p. 9 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not considered — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not considered — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner sought classification as a computer-science researcher/web database developer and submitted evidence concerning awards, membership, published material, judging, original contributions, and scholarly authorship.; evidence_pages: 2; 3; 5; 6; 7; 9
claim: The AAO found the collegiate student honor did not qualify as a nationally or internationally recognized field award; the claimed association membership, media, judging, contributions, and authorship evidence also failed the discussed criteria.; evidence_pages: 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9
claim: The decision concluded the petitioner had not shown a qualifying major award or at least three criteria and dismissed the appeal.; evidence_pages: 10
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
Computing sector research
Threshold research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.