EB-1A Sustained — Pediatric Endocrinology (2015): the AAO found the evidence met three regulatory criteria:
Filing your own EB-1A? See how your CV maps to the criteria this decision turned on — free strategy preview.
Decision Summary
The appeal was sustained because the AAO found the evidence met three regulatory criteria: service as a manuscript reviewer (judging others' work), authorship of chapters in significant medical textbooks (original contributions), and authorship of scholarly articles. During the final merits determination, the AAO concluded that the beneficiary's high-level positions, impactful publications described as a "definitive reference," and strong expert testimony established that he has sustained national acclaim and is among the small percentage at the very top of his field.
See how a decision like this gets cited in an EB-1A petition →Criteria Discussed
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →Filing your own EB-1A? See what made this petition succeed.
Upload your CV and see how your profile maps to the criteria the AAO sustained here — free strategy preview, no credit card.
Map Your CV to These Criteria →No credit card required.