AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision Apr262007_01B2203

Research grants do not count as awards, routine peer‑review is insufficient for the judging criterion, and published articles must be primarily about the petitioner; citations alone do not satisfy the scholarly‑article requirement. Research grants are not awards that recognize past excellence; Routi

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID Apr262007_01B2203 Decision date 2007-04-26 Outcome dismissed Field or occupation Not stated in the extracted decision plan. Final merits discussed Yes

Criteria Discussed

  • awards

  • judging

  • original_contributions

  • published_material

  • scholarly_articles

Criteria Accepted

  • scholarly_articles

Criteria Rejected

  • awards

  • judging

  • original_contributions

  • published_material

Core Lesson

Research grants do not count as awards, routine peer‑review is insufficient for the judging criterion, and published articles must be primarily about the petitioner; citations alone do not satisfy the scholarly‑article requirement.

Evidence Issue

  • Research grants are not awards that recognize past excellence

  • Routine peer‑review does not demonstrate the petitioner’s judging of the field

  • Published material must be about the alien, not merely list the alien in a summary

  • Evidence that original contributions are widely recognized, reproduced, and of major significance

How This Connects

This decision is part of Extraordinary's AAO EB-1A corpus. It is exposed as a structured decision card so readers, search engines, and AI search systems can connect the decision to broader EB-1A evidence patterns.

Source Note

Non-precedent AAO decisions are used as evidence examples. They are not binding authority and do not predict any individual case.