AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision AUG112020_02B2203: martial arts officiating (Muay Thai professional referee) and failure to meet the three-criterion threshold

For the EB‑1A judging criterion, you must provide clear, detailed evidence that your role involved evaluating or judging performances; generic referee certifications or rule‑enforcement duties are insufficient. Comparative circulation statistics and author names for published articles.; Demonstratio

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID AUG112020_02B2203 Decision date 2020-08-11 Outcome motion_dismissed Field or occupation martial arts officiating (Muay Thai professional referee) Final merits discussed No / not stated

Criteria Discussed

  • artistic_display

  • awards

  • commercial_success

  • high_salary

  • judging

  • leading_critical_role

  • membership

  • original_contributions

  • published_material

  • scholarly_articles

Criteria Accepted

Not stated in the extracted decision plan.

Criteria Rejected

  • artistic_display

  • awards

  • commercial_success

  • high_salary

  • judging

  • membership

  • original_contributions

  • published_material

  • scholarly_articles

Core Lesson

For the EB‑1A judging criterion, you must provide clear, detailed evidence that your role involved evaluating or judging performances; generic referee certifications or rule‑enforcement duties are insufficient.

Evidence Issue

  • Comparative circulation statistics and author names for published articles.

  • Demonstration that the listed awards have national or international significance.

  • A detailed description of the referee duties that shows evaluative or judging functions rather than mere rule enforcement.

  • Evidence satisfying at least three of the ten EB‑1A 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.