AAO research
AAO EB-1A decision APR282015_01B2203
Peer‑reviewer and editorial‑board service, when documented alongside citations and industry adoption, can satisfy the EB‑1A judging criterion and demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim. The decision offers a generic illustration of the judging criterion with no specific profession,
Decision Snapshot
Field Value --- --- Decision ID APR282015_01B2203 Decision date 2015-04-28 Outcome sustained Field or occupation Not stated in the extracted decision plan. Final merits discussed Yes
Criteria Discussed
judging
original_contributions
scholarly_articles
Criteria Accepted
judging
original_contributions
scholarly_articles
Criteria Rejected
Not stated in the extracted decision plan.
Core Lesson
Peer‑reviewer and editorial‑board service, when documented alongside citations and industry adoption, can satisfy the EB‑1A judging criterion and demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.
Evidence Issue
Not stated in the extracted decision plan.
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.