sustained EB-1A Case: Pediatric Endocrinology
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.
Criteria Discussed
Sign up free to download the original PDF
Downloaded the case? Use it in your next draft →Draft with AAO-aware legal structure
MeritDraft helps you turn research into a criteria-based petition draft with organized evidence, legal framing, and attorney-ready structure.
Start a Criteria-Based Draft →No credit card required. Generate your first petition draft in minutes.