AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision APR062026_03B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed The threshold criteria were met, but the totality failed final merits; the AAO affirmed the denial.
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.
Scope classification from review: The decision identifies a Form I-140 extraordinary-ability proceeding under INA § 203(b)(1)(A).. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | APR062026_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | April 6, 2026 |
Classification / field stated in source | AAO Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability decision; procedural posture noted below. |
Procedural posture | Appeal from Service Center Operations final-merits denial; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | AAO expressly conducted final merits and found that evidence of research, company leadership, patents, coverage, letters, and partnerships did not show sustained acclaim or standing among the small percentage at the top. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The threshold criteria were met, but the totality failed final merits; the AAO affirmed the denial.
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 met — p. 2 |
Membership | Not met — p. 2 |
Published material about the person | met — p. 2 |
Judging the work of others | met — p. 2 |
Original contributions of major significance | met — p. 2 |
Scholarly authorship | met — p. 2 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | met — p. 2 |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: SCOPS found five threshold criteria met (published material, judging, original contributions, scholarly authorship, and leading/critical role) and found awards and membership criteria unmet.; pages: 2
claim: AAO agreed the totality did not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field status; originality, patents, publications, media, letters, leadership, and investment/partnership evidence did not prove major field impact or field-wide recognition.; pages: 3; 5; 6; 7
claim: Appeal dismissed after adverse final merits.; pages: 6; 7
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible for individual case discussion
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
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
Awards research
Membership research
Published material about the person research
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Leading or critical role research
Medicine sector research
Threshold research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.