AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision APR302009_02B2203: Outcome

EB-1A outcome — AAO decision APR302009_02B2203: dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.

Decision summary: AAO decision APR302009_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	APR302009_02B2203
Decision date as printed	2009-04-30
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 separate formal Kazarian final-merits section; aggregate sustained-acclaim/top-of-field finding at page 7.

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 NCAA/collegiate wins were restricted to students; participation certificates and team selections were not awards; no competition after 2002 supported sustained acclaim near filing; pages 3-4. — source PDF
Membership	Discussed; state not normalized All-American/All-Region/All-Conference team membership criteria and an association were not shown; page 4. — source PDF
Published material about the person	Discussed; state not normalized Only one article was primarily about petitioner; others covered team/events/results; only Boston Globe and Track & Field were potentially major outlets; pages 5-6. — source PDF
Judging the work of others	Not coded — source PDF
Original contributions of major significance	Discussed; state not normalized Competing/winning did not itself prove field-level major contribution; no evidence of claimed impact promoting running or public health; page 6. — source PDF
Scholarly authorship	Not coded — source PDF
Artistic display or showcases	Not coded — source PDF
Leading or critical role	Discussed; state not normalized Captaincy/team participation did not establish distinguished reputation and individual criticality; page 6. — 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: Useful supporting historical example in awards/published-material/leadership comparisons; pair with modern records and avoid athlete-wide conclusions.

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 APR302009_02B2203