AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision OCT312018_02B2203: Appeal sustained; petition approved. Review source status, procedural posture and the…
Decision summary: AAO decision OCT312018_02B2203: Appeal sustained; petition approved. AAO accepted judging, authorship, and original contributions of major significance; evidence showed cancer drug-delivery research was adopted and developed by independent researchers. Final merits credited research citations, patents, funding, publication record and sustained field impact.
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. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | OCT312018_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | October 31, 2018 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability petition / AAO decision |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial of EB-1A petition. |
Operative disposition | Appeal sustained; petition approved. |
Final-merits status | reached_and_favorable |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO accepted judging, authorship, and original contributions of major significance; evidence showed cancer drug-delivery research was adopted and developed by independent researchers. Final merits credited research citations, patents, funding, publication record and sustained field impact.
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 | |
Original contributions of major significance | met |
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
"Redactions and missing underlying publications, patent files, letters and grant evidence limit independent verification."
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: Director found judging and authorship; AAO concluded research on nano/microstructured materials for targeted cancer drug delivery met original-contributions criterion because independent researchers adopted/developed findings.; pages: 2; 3; 4
claim: Final merits cited patents/funding, extensive publications, hundreds of citations and research influence.; pages: 4; 5
claim: AAO found top-of-field sustained acclaim and sustained appeal.; pages: 5
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible for individual case discussion_with_careful_citations
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 2 — Initial criteria, research area and claimed evidence.
PDF page 3 — Cancer research uptake by independent researchers.
PDF page 4 — Contributions criterion met and final-merits analysis begins.
PDF page 5 — Patents, grants, publication/citation record, final merits and conclusion.
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
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Medicine sector research
Final Merits research
Major Significance research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.