AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision SEP022009_06B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision SEP022009_06B2203: Appeal dismissed. AAO expressly found original contributions and scholarly authorship met but other asserted criteria insufficient; it concluded the petitioner did not establish eligibility. (pp. 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 | SEP022009_06B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | September 2, 2009 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A petition in biological sciences; petitioner was a postdoctoral researcher. (pp. 2–3) |
Procedural posture | Appeal from Texas Service Center denial; AAO dismissed. (pp. 2, 12) |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed. |
Final-merits status | The AAO found the petition failed overall and dismissed it; the decision does not articulate a separate later-style final-merits step. (pp. 11–12) |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO expressly found original contributions and scholarly authorship met but other asserted criteria insufficient; it concluded the petitioner did not establish eligibility. (pp. 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 met |
Membership | not met |
Published material about the person | Not met — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | not met |
Original contributions of major significance | met — source PDF |
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
Petitioner identity is redacted; source contains occasional pronoun/OCR inconsistencies, but identity/date/order are clear.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: If cleared after editorial review, prepare a decision-specific source-linked summary with exact procedural posture, criterion states, dated page citations, redaction preservation, and non-precedent notice where applicable. Narrow biological-research comparison on independent downstream use of methods as contributions evidence, separately from authorship; historical and case-specific.
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
Awards research
Membership research
Judging the work of others research
Scholarly authorship research
Medicine sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.