AAO research
EB-1A three-criterion threshold — AAO decision APR272005_04B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision APR272005_04B2203: Appeal 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 | APR272005_04B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2005-04-21 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A appeal; petitioner’s claimed fields were physics and international affairs/diplomacy; AAO treated the intended occupation as unspecified and discussed a field mismatch. |
Procedural posture | Appeal from denial; pre-Kazarian-era decision applying the three-of-ten threshold, without a distinct modern final-merits stage. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed. |
Final-merits status | distinct_modern_step: ; record_level_conclusion: AAO concluded the evidence did not establish sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing after its regulatory-criteria discussion (p. 8). Do not call this a separate Kazarian final-merits determination. |
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 | Not coded — source PDF |
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 | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: A historical single-stage threshold-failure example showing that senior diplomatic title and general praise did not substitute for documented criterion evidence. Keep the 2005 analytical framework and separate occupation/continuing-work ground explicit; do not blend it into a modern two-step cohort. [{'fact': 'The AAO said ambassadorial rank was not itself a major internationally recognized award and required at least three of ten regulatory criteria absent such an award.', 'pages': [3]}, {'fact': 'It found no qualifying award or membership evidence, and the articles about diplomatic postings were press releases or presidential-activity coverage that did not establish personal acclaim.', 'pages': [4, 5]}, {'fact': 'The AAO found no judging, no qualifying scholarly authorship, and no original contributions of major significance; the evidence did not show field impact from physics work or specific significant impact in diplomacy.', 'pages': [5, 6, 7]}, {'fact': 'The one criterion it found met was leading/critical role as ambassador/delegate in international affairs. Salary evidence was unsupported by objective remuneration and comparative pay data; commercial-success criterion did not apply to the stated fields.', 'pages': [7, 8]}, {'fact': 'The AAO also identified a separate eligibility issue: the petitioner did not specify the intended occupation or provide evidence of plans to continue in the claimed field in the United States.', 'pages': [2, 3]}]
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
Medicine sector research
Threshold research
Major Significance research
Coverage research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.