AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision DEC122024_02B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision DEC122024_02B2203: Appeal dismissed. Failure to establish at least three initial evidentiary criteria; final-merits step not reached.
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_EB1A_individual_decision. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | DEC122024_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | December 12, 2024 |
Classification / field stated in source | Form I-140; caption says “Exceptional Ability,” body says extraordinary ability / EB-1A |
Procedural posture | Appeal from Nebraska Service Center denial; de novo AAO review. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed. |
Final-merits status | Not reached_initial_threshold_failed |
What the AAO decision addressed
Failure to establish at least three initial evidentiary criteria; final-merits step not reached.
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 | |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not coded — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not met — p. 3 |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — p. 4 |
Scholarly authorship | Not coded — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — p. 5 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
"No identity/completeness hold; document caption’s exceptional-ability wording differs from body’s EB-1A extraordinary-ability classification."
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: Petitioner claimed awards, judging, original contributions, leading/critical role, and high salary; AAO found none of the five criteria met.; pages: 2; 3; 4; 5
claim: Training certificates were not awards; employer awards lacked evidence of recognition and selection criteria; selecting fashion-show models was not judging; employer work was not shown as field-wide major contribution; role/reputation and comparative salary were insufficiently established.; pages: 2; 3; 4; 5
claim: AAO dismissed appeal without a formal final-merits determination because fewer than three initial criteria were met.; pages: 5
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: in_scope_EB1A_individual_decision
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 1 — Cover identifies case, retail manager and appeal.
PDF page 2 — EB-1A legal standard and award/judging criteria analysis begins.
PDF page 3 — Awards and fashion-show model selection analysis.
PDF page 4 — Original contributions and leading/critical role analysis.
PDF page 5 — Role reputation, salary, conclusion and order dismissing appeal.
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
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Leading or critical role research
High salary or remuneration research
Entrepreneurship sector research
Performance sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.