AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision Aug092012_02B2203

Petitioners must meet at least three EB‑1A evidentiary criteria with solid, documented evidence; vague reference letters and missing evidence lead to dismissal. Failure to satisfy the regulatory requirement of three distinct evidentiary criteria.; Lack of concrete, verifiable evidence for original c

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID Aug092012_02B2203 Decision date 2012-08-09 Outcome dismissed Field or occupation Not stated in the extracted decision plan. Final merits discussed Yes

Criteria Discussed

  • artistic_display

  • awards

  • commercial_success

  • high_salary

  • judging

  • leading_critical_role

  • membership

  • original_contributions

  • published_material

Criteria Accepted

  • awards

  • judging

Criteria Rejected

  • original_contributions

  • published_material

Core Lesson

Petitioners must meet at least three EB‑1A evidentiary criteria with solid, documented evidence; vague reference letters and missing evidence lead to dismissal.

Evidence Issue

  • Failure to satisfy the regulatory requirement of three distinct evidentiary criteria.

  • Lack of concrete, verifiable evidence for original contributions; reliance on vague reference letters.

  • Insufficient published material demonstrating the petitioner’s impact.

  • No evidence submitted for several claimed criteria.

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.