AAO research
EB-1A three-criterion threshold — AAO decision AUG162006_03B2203: Appeal dismissed with an AAO finding of fraud; decision also says failure to demonstrate…
Decision summary: AAO decision AUG162006_03B2203: Appeal dismissed with an AAO finding of fraud; decision also says failure to demonstrate at least three criteria and lack of evidence of intended continued work were independent/alternative denial grounds. 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 | AUG162006_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2006-08-16 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition; petitioner described as sculptor, decorating expert, and designer. |
Procedural posture | AAO appeal under an older decision format. Before decision, AAO sent a notice of derogatory information and allowed 30 days to respond; decision says petitioner did not respond. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed with an AAO finding of fraud; decision also says failure to demonstrate at least three criteria and lack of evidence of intended continued work were independent/alternative denial grounds. |
Final-merits status | Not coded in the normalized review fields |
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 | 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-cited findings recorded in review
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Can illustrate the procedural fact that the AAO disclosed derogatory information and allowed a response, but it should not be grouped as an ordinary criterion-denial example or used to imply fraud from missing or weak evidence.
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
Performance sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.