AAO research
EB-1A motions to reopen — AAO decision AUG092023_01B2203: Motion to reopen and motion to reconsider dismissed; underlying petition remains denied (p. 5).…
Decision summary: AAO decision AUG092023_01B2203: Motion to reopen and motion to reconsider dismissed; underlying petition remains denied (p. 5). Current motions largely repeated earlier arguments, supplied no new facts bearing on the latest decision, and did not show error in the most recent decision. AAO declined to re-adjudicate the petition anew; underlying appeal had been summarily dismissed after no supporting brief/evidence was submitted within the stated 30-day period (pp. 2-5).
Source limitation: The review record contains a source hold or limitation. Read the limitation below before relying on any case detail; unresolved facts are not treated as findings.
Scope classification from review: in_scope_with_source_label_conflict. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | AUG092023_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | August 9, 2023 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability; petitioner is a mechanical engineering technical specialist. The cover also refers to National Interest Waiver, while the discussion identifies extraordinary-ability basis (p. 1). |
Procedural posture | Seventh combined motion to reopen and reconsider following appeal and serial motions; current review limited to latest prior motion dismissal (pp. 1-3). |
Operative disposition | Motion to reopen and motion to reconsider dismissed; underlying petition remains denied (p. 5). |
Final-merits status | Not coded in the normalized review fields |
What the AAO decision addressed
Current motions largely repeated earlier arguments, supplied no new facts bearing on the latest decision, and did not show error in the most recent decision. AAO declined to re-adjudicate the petition anew; underlying appeal had been summarily dismissed after no supporting brief/evidence was submitted within the stated 30-day period (pp. 2-5).
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 |
Source holds and limits
"Cover labels petition as NIW while body identifies extraordinary ability; source-level classification inconsistency requires explicit editorial hold before a standalone case page."
Source-cited findings recorded in review
p1: Cover identifies seventh combined motion, technical specialist, and motion dismissal; (cover has NIW label but body discusses EB-1A).; p2: Procedural timeline of serial filings; most recent earlier decision dismissed sixth motion.; p3: Scope limited to latest decision; prior appeal’s missing supporting brief/evidence discussed.; p4: Repetition of earlier argument and policy rationale for limits on serial motions.; p5: No new facts or shown error; motions dismissed; petition remains denied.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Procedural explainer on serial motion limits, the need to address the latest decision, and appeal briefing deadlines. It does not supply substantive EB-1A criterion guidance. May be used only in procedural content about motions/filing process, with the serial history and source’s cover/body label inconsistency disclosed.
Editorial use note: May be used only in procedural content about motions/filing process, with the serial history and source’s cover/body label inconsistency disclosed.
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 4 — Repetition of earlier argument and policy rationale for limits on serial motions.
PDF page 5 — No new facts or shown error; motions dismissed; petition remains denied.
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
Computing sector research
Waiv research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.