AAO research
AAO EB-1A decision APR282025_03B2203
When the AAO remands a case without addressing any EB‑1A criteria, it signals that the record lacked clear evidence for at least one criterion; petitioners should ensure the submission contains concrete, criterion‑specific evidence to avoid a procedural remand. no evidence sufficient to meet any EB‑
Decision Snapshot
Field Value --- --- Decision ID APR282025_03B2203 Decision date not stated in the extraction Outcome remanded Field or occupation Not stated in the extracted decision plan. Final merits discussed No / not stated
Criteria Discussed
Not stated in the extracted decision plan.
Criteria Accepted
Not stated in the extracted decision plan.
Criteria Rejected
Not stated in the extracted decision plan.
Core Lesson
When the AAO remands a case without addressing any EB‑1A criteria, it signals that the record lacked clear evidence for at least one criterion; petitioners should ensure the submission contains concrete, criterion‑specific evidence to avoid a procedural remand.
Evidence Issue
no evidence sufficient to meet any EB‑1A criteria, leading to a remand without criteria analysis
How This Connects
This decision is part of Extraordinary's AAO EB-1A corpus. It is exposed as a structured decision card so readers, search engines, and AI search systems can connect the decision to broader EB-1A evidence patterns.
Source Note
Non-precedent AAO decisions are used as evidence examples. They are not binding authority and do not predict any individual case.