AAO research
EB-1A three-criterion threshold — AAO decision OCT232018_01B2203: Sustained. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision OCT232018_01B2203: Sustained. AAO agreed at least three criteria were met and found the total record established sustained acclaim/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: in_scope_EB1A_AAO_decision. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | OCT232018_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | October 23, 2018 |
Classification / field stated in source | Appeal sustained |
Procedural posture | Appeal from denial; Director found judging, original contributions, and scholarly authorship; AAO reviewed totality/final merits. |
Operative disposition | Sustained |
Final-merits status | Favorable; AAO found extraordinary ability through sustained acclaim and sustained the appeal. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO agreed at least three criteria were met and found the total record established sustained acclaim/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 reached — source PDF |
Membership | Not reached — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not reached |
Judging the work of others | met — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | met — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not reached |
High salary or remuneration | Not reached — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not reached — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: Cover identifies the petitioner as a structural-biology research scientist and the appeal.; pages: 1
claim: AAO identifies the three criteria found met by the Director and reviews judging/authorship evidence.; pages: 2
claim: AAO evaluates expert evidence and contributions, then begins final merits.; pages: 3
claim: AAO concludes the total record establishes eligibility and sustains the appeal.; pages: 4
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: eligible_for_narrow_fact_grounded_content: True; must_preserve_procedural_posture: True; recommended_use: Strong research example on the combined use of peer review, scholarly authorship, and expert evidence about contributions. Do not imply citation counts or patent filing alone were dispositive.
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
Published material about the person research
Leading or critical role research
Medicine sector research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.