AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision APR292020_04B2203

Meeting three EB‑1A criteria (e.g., high salary, judging, scholarly articles) is not enough; petitioners must also provide clear evidence of sustained national or international acclaim that demonstrates they are among the top few percent of their field. Evidence of sustained national or internationa

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID APR292020_04B2203 Decision date not stated Outcome dismissed Field or occupation Not stated in the extracted decision plan. Final merits discussed Yes

Criteria Discussed

  • high_salary

  • judging

  • leading_critical_role

  • membership

  • original_contributions

  • published_material

  • scholarly_articles

Criteria Accepted

  • high_salary

  • judging

  • scholarly_articles

Criteria Rejected

  • leading_critical_role

  • membership

  • original_contributions

  • published_material

Core Lesson

Meeting three EB‑1A criteria (e.g., high salary, judging, scholarly articles) is not enough; petitioners must also provide clear evidence of sustained national or international acclaim that demonstrates they are among the top few percent of their field.

Evidence Issue

  • Evidence of sustained national or international acclaim that places petitioner among the top percentage of the field

  • Documentation that judging activity or scholarly authorship had significant impact and signified top‑percentile status

  • Proof that the petitioner held a leading or essential role in a major project or organization

  • Citation metrics, independent expert letters, or other proof showing the published material influenced the field

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.