AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision AUG052009_06B2203: A cinematographer's appeal was dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision AUG052009_06B2203: A cinematographer’s appeal was dismissed.
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 | AUG052009_06B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | Not stated in normalized review fields |
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 | A cinematographer's appeal was dismissed. |
Final-merits status | "No distinct formal final-merits determination. The decision contains an overall conclusion about acclaim, but this older decision should not be described as a modern two-step final-merits example." |
What the AAO decision addressed
A cinematographer's appeal was dismissed.
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 — 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 |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
finding: The AAO found the ASC Heritage Award honorable mention, student awards, and claimed film-festival honors insufficient. The Heritage competition was aimed at students/recent graduates; the petitioner did not establish broader recognition of the awards. The foreign festival's status as an old regional festival alone did not demonstrate award recognition beyond the festival.; pages: 3-6
finding: The petitioner was identified as director of photography on films said to receive festival awards, but the AAO emphasized that the record did not establish the awards as nationally or internationally recognized in her field. A 2000 commendation was issued to another person and did not name the petitioner.; pages: 5-6
finding: The AAO dismissed the appeal after concluding the record did not establish extraordinary ability. The decision does not contain a distinct, modern Kazarian final-merits section.; pages: 14
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Claimed awards and whether they showed recognized excellence in cinematography.
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
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.