AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision SEP162005_03B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed The AAO rejects award, membership, published-material, judging, original-contributions, scholarly-authorship, display, leading-role, and high-salary evidence and finds no sustained acclaim or 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: Physical source is an AAO decision on an EB-1A extraordinary-ability Form I-140 appeal.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | SEP162005_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | September 16, 2005 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability (Form I-140) |
Procedural posture | Nonprecedent AAO appeal from a Vermont Service Center denial; appeal dismissed after criteria and totality review. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | The AAO concludes the record does not show sustained national/international acclaim or recognition placing petitioner among the small percentage at the top of the field. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO rejects award, membership, published-material, judging, original-contributions, scholarly-authorship, display, leading-role, and high-salary evidence and finds no sustained acclaim or 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 | |
Membership | |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not met — p. 7 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | |
High salary or remuneration | |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: Petitioner seeks classification based on software engineering/architecture work and evidence connected to Goldman Sachs.; evidence_pages: 1; 2; 4; 5
claim: The AAO finds the claimed awards, association membership, publication, judging, contributions, authorship, role, and salary evidence insufficient.; evidence_pages: 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10
claim: The AAO’s conclusion finds the record does not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing and dismisses the appeal.; evidence_pages: 9; 10
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible with caveats
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
Awards research
Membership research
Published material about the person research
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Artistic display or showcases research
Leading or critical role research
High salary or remuneration research
Commercial success in the performing arts research
Computing sector research
Other Named Professions sector research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.