AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision APR142006_02B2203: Outcome

EB-1A outcome — AAO decision APR142006_02B2203: dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.

Decision summary: AAO decision APR142006_02B2203: dismissed. 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	APR142006_02B2203
Decision date as printed	2006-04-14
Classification / field stated in source	Classification not stated in the normalized review fields
Procedural posture	Procedural posture not separately coded in the normalized review fields. Consult the source PDF.
Operative disposition	dismissed
Final-merits status	No modern formal final-merits step; aggregate acclaim/top-of-field conclusion at pages 9-10.

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	Discussed; state not normalized Sparse field and class sizes, unclear award recognition, and no evidence of an adequately broad competitor pool; pages 3-4. — source PDF
Membership	Discussed; state not normalized IFBB membership followed national federation membership; federation's qualifying criteria were not provided; page 5. — source PDF
Published material about the person	Discussed; state not normalized OCR review confirms criterion is discussed; the decision treated the submitted press/photographic evidence as insufficient. Use only after a direct page-specific citation is selected from the PDF image; page 5-6 scan text is partially degraded. — source PDF
Judging the work of others	Not coded — source PDF
Original contributions of major significance	Discussed; state not normalized Expert/photographer letters did not show impact on the field; video sales were not shown to benefit the sport; pages 6-8. — source PDF
Scholarly authorship	Not coded — source PDF
Artistic display or showcases	Discussed; state not normalized AAO rejected equating bodybuilding competitions with artistic exhibitions/showcases under the then-presented record; pages 8-9. — source PDF
Leading or critical role	Not coded — source PDF
High salary or remuneration	Not coded — source PDF
Commercial success in the performing arts	Discussed; state not normalized Petitioner was an athlete rather than performing artist; video sales evidence lacked official sales data and was not commercially significant; page 9. — source PDF

How this record may be used in research

Comparison scope: Limited supplemental historical example for performance/display and contribution distinctions; poor standalone SEO content. Better suited to a broad evidence taxonomy than a modern claim about bodybuilding.

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

Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.

Primary source

Official USCIS AAO decision PDF for APR142006_02B2203