AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision OCT312018_03B2203: Appeal dismissed (p. 7). Review source status, procedural posture and the official…
Decision summary: AAO decision OCT312018_03B2203: Appeal dismissed (p. 7). AAO found three initial criteria met: peer-review judging; original contributions (including research tools/mouse models and cited work); and peer-reviewed scholarly authorship. It then found final merits adverse: publication metrics and citations did not establish top-of-field standing, media coverage did not identify petitioner, and editorial-board evidence was limited/incomplete (pp. 2–7).
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 | OCT312018_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | October 31, 2018 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A sciences appeal; petitioner is a research scientist in microbiology, including Zika/ocular-infection and antimicrobial work. |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Nebraska Service Center decision; director found judging and scholarly authorship; AAO also found original contributions met, but dismissed on final merits (pp. 1–7). |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed (p. 7). |
Final-merits status | Explicit final-merits determination: adverse. Though three criteria were met, citation counts, publication prestige, local/news-release coverage and incomplete editorial-board/judging details did not show sustained acclaim or top-of-field status (pp. 5–7). |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found three initial criteria met: peer-review judging; original contributions (including research tools/mouse models and cited work); and peer-reviewed scholarly authorship. It then found final merits adverse: publication metrics and citations did not establish top-of-field standing, media coverage did not identify petitioner, and editorial-board evidence was limited/incomplete (pp. 2–7).
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 | met |
Original contributions of major significance | met |
Scholarly authorship | met — source PDF |
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-cited findings recorded in review
Citations are physical PDF page numbers. Every physical page was visually inspected in page order.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Excellent nuanced research comparison: initial-criteria success including a major-contribution finding followed by an adverse final-merits analysis. Keep findings tied to this case and its nonprecedent status. High-value individual page distinguishing initial criteria from final merits; avoid generalizing its case-specific outcome. No CMS edits or publication were made.
Editorial use note: High-value individual page distinguishing initial criteria from final merits; avoid generalizing its case-specific outcome. No CMS edits or publication were made.
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
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Medicine sector research
Final Merits research
Coverage research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.