AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision APR142011_01B2203: AAO found petitioner did not satisfy the antecedent three-category requirement. It also gives an aggregate…
Decision summary: AAO decision APR142011_01B2203: AAO found petitioner did not satisfy the antecedent three-category requirement. It also gives an aggregate merits assessment that the record did not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing as a violist or music teacher (pp. 20-23).
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: in_scope_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | APR142011_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | April 14, 2011 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A petition in the arts for a professional violist; record discusses orchestral performance, awards, articles, judging, contributions, display, roles, and commercial-success evidence (pp. 2, 6-20). |
Procedural posture | Director denial appealed; AAO dismissed (pp. 2, 23). |
Operative disposition | AAO found petitioner did not satisfy the antecedent three-category requirement. It also gives an aggregate merits assessment that the record did not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing as a violist or music teacher (pp. 20-23). |
Final-merits status | Final merits discussion is explicit and adverse (pp. 20-23). |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found petitioner did not satisfy the antecedent three-category requirement. It also gives an aggregate merits assessment that the record did not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing as a violist or music teacher (pp. 20-23).
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 |
Membership | not met |
Published material about the person | not met |
Judging the work of others | Not coded — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | not met |
Scholarly authorship | Not coded — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | not met |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | not met |
Source holds and limits
No source identity, completeness, or integrity hold. Public copy redacts claimant identities; no identifying inference should be added.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Suitable for a sourced explainer on criterion-level proof vs overall merits; mention nonprecedent status and avoid treating any one performance as a general rule.
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
Awards research
Membership research
Published material about the person research
Original contributions of major significance research
Leading or critical role research
Commercial success in the performing arts research
Performance sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.