AAO research
EB-1A membership — AAO decision SEP302009_01B2203: The appeal was dismissed; petition remained denied. Review source status, procedural posture and the…
Decision summary: AAO decision SEP302009_01B2203: The appeal was dismissed; petition remained denied. AAO found the petitioner did not satisfy at least three criteria and that aggregate evidence did not distinguish him as one of the small percentage at the top (p. 15).
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 | SEP302009_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | September 30, 2009 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A sciences petition by a biomedical researcher working in endocrinology/reproduction research and later at a children’s hospital/Harvard Medical School laboratory (pp. 2-3). |
Procedural posture | Texas Service Center denial appealed; AAO dismissed (pp. 2, 15). |
Operative disposition | The appeal was dismissed; petition remained denied. |
Final-merits status | No distinct Kazarian final-merits determination because the three-category threshold was not met; the AAO expressly reviewed evidence in aggregate and found it insufficient (p. 15). |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found the petitioner did not satisfy at least three criteria and that aggregate evidence did not distinguish him as one of the small percentage at the top (p. 15).
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 — source PDF |
Membership | not met |
Published material about the person | not met |
Judging the work of others | Not coded — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | not met |
Scholarly authorship | not met |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | not met |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
No source hold. Redacted identity; note historical 2009 decision and nonprecedential nature.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: A case summary can distinguish travel support, paper citations, and conference presentations from sustained recognition and top-of-field standing (pp. 3-15).
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
Membership research
Published material about the person research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Leading or critical role research
Medicine sector research
Teaching sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.