AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision OCT282021_01B2203: The AAO dismissed the appeal and did not approve the petition. (final page; see posture…
Decision summary: AAO decision OCT282021_01B2203: The AAO dismissed the appeal and did not approve the petition. (final page; see posture and outcome citations). The Director found only two of ten initial criteria satisfied; AAO dismissed after review of the claimed criteria. (pp. 1-2, 12).
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_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | OCT282021_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | October 28, 2021 |
Classification / field stated in source | Nonprecedent EB-1A sciences petition by a medical consultant and former director of a hospital diabetes department. (pp. 1-2) |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial; AAO dismissed, treating the discussed grounds as independent and alternate bases. (pp. 1, 12) |
Operative disposition | The AAO dismissed the appeal and did not approve the petition. (final page; see posture and outcome citations) |
Final-merits status | Not reached; the petition failed the initial three-category requirement. (pp. 1-2, 12) |
What the AAO decision addressed
The Director found only two of ten initial criteria satisfied; AAO dismissed after review of the claimed criteria. (pp. 1-2, 12)
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 coded — source PDF |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not coded — 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 met |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
No identity/completeness hold. Nonprecedent decision, with redacted names/institutions; preserve that authorship was accepted but the overall threshold was not met.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: A well-cited research case page could explain the separate standards for scholarly authorship, major contributions, and a critical role, without implying that publications satisfy all three.
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
Judging the work of others research
Scholarly authorship research
Leading or critical role research
Entrepreneurship sector research
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.