AAO research
EB-1A withdrawal and mootness — AAO decision APR052005_02B2203: ORDER: The decision of the director is withdrawn. The appeal is sustained and the petition…
Decision summary: AAO decision APR052005_02B2203: ORDER: The decision of the director is withdrawn. The appeal is sustained and the petition is approved.; 4. The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
Source reviewed: This page summarizes the specific AAO source and posture recorded in the completed source-review tracker. It does not turn a nonprecedent decision into a general rule.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | APR052005_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | {'value': '2005-04-05', 'confidence': 'high', 'support': 'Cover page date (PDF p.1).'} |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability; petitioner proposed fashion-model work and AAO considered evidence from both modeling and acting (PDF pp.2-3). |
Procedural posture | AAO appeal from California Service Center denial; AAO withdrew director decision, sustained appeal, and approved petition (PDF p.4). |
Operative disposition | {'exact': 'ORDER: The decision of the director is withdrawn. The appeal is sustained and the petition is approved.', 'page': 4} |
Final-merits status | Not coded in the normalized review fields |
What the AAO decision addressed
The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
Criterion-by-criterion status in this source
These labels reproduce the source-review record. “Not considered,” “not reached,” and “not coded” do not mean the criterion failed. A Director finding recited as background is not an AAO holding unless the decision says so.
Criterion | Source-review status |
|---|---|
Awards | Not coded — source PDF |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Discussed; state not normalized |
Judging the work of others | Not coded — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not coded — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not coded — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not coded — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Discussed; state not normalized |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Discussed; state not normalized |
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: [{'fact': 'AAO accepted published articles as being about the petitioner and found some appeared in nationally distributed publications.', 'pages': [3]}, {'fact': 'It also accepted unusually high modeling remuneration and film commercial-success evidence, reaching three criteria without deciding leading role.', 'pages': [3, 4]}, {'fact': 'Appeal sustained and petition approved.', 'pages': [4]}]
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
Open the official USCIS decision PDF. Page-specific citations were not available in the normalized row.
How to use this record
This is a historical, nonprecedent AAO decision about its own administrative record. It is not a prediction, success rate, or current filing instruction. Compare the issue and procedural stage before drawing an analogy. The current framework is in the USCIS Policy Manual, Volume 6, Part F, Chapter 2.
Related corpus research
Full-corpus research index
Performance sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.