AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision SEP232015_02B2203: approved. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision SEP232015_02B2203: approved. The AAO found the petitioner met three criteria and, considering the totality of evidence, established sustained acclaim and 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: Source is an AAO EB-1A extraordinary-ability appellate decision.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | SEP232015_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | Sept. 23, 2015 (page 1 appears to contain a typographical year “20105”; page 7 citation identifies Sept. 23, 2015) |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A appellate decision, Matter of Y-X- |
Procedural posture | Appeal sustained; petition approved. |
Operative disposition | approved |
Final-merits status | Favorable totality / final-merits analysis; approval. Decision date on page 1 appears misprinted as 20105; page 7’s citation confirms 2015. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO found the petitioner met three criteria and, considering the totality of evidence, established sustained acclaim and 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 | Not coded — source PDF |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not coded — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met — p. 3 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | met — p. 3 |
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
claim: The AAO found judging, original contributions of major significance, and scholarly authorship criteria met.; pages: 3
claim: Record described research addressing spinal injury / reactive oxygen species and chromatin remodelers, supported by publications, citations, expert letters and invited presentations.; pages: 3; 4; 5
claim: The AAO found the total evidence established sustained acclaim and standing near the top of the field; appeal sustained and petition approved.; pages: 5; 6; 7
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible for individual case discussion
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 2 — Legal standard, petition background and evidence overview.
PDF page 4 — Research contributions and expert / publication evidence described.
PDF page 5 — Citation, invited presentation, expert recognition and totality evidence reviewed.
PDF page 6 — Sustained acclaim / top-of-field analysis continued.
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
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.