AAO research
EB-1A motion disposition — AAO decision DEC152006_03B2203: Appeal dismissed; petition denied. Review source status, procedural posture and the official…
Decision summary: AAO decision DEC152006_03B2203: Appeal dismissed; petition denied. 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.
Scope classification from review: in_scope_procedural_eb1a_decision. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | DEC152006_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2006-12-15 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: Appeal from Vermont Service Center denial. Director found failure to satisfy criteria; petitioner relied on business records, client letters, promotional material, and asserted personal ownership/role.; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; 4; classification: appeal_or_motion_as_described_in_identity; director_findings: Appeal from Vermont Service Center denial. Director found failure to satisfy criteria; petitioner relied on business records, client letters, promotional material, and asserted personal ownership/role. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Appeal dismissed; petition denied.', 'basis': 'Evidence did not demonstrate a major award, three qualifying criteria, sustained acclaim, or top-of-field standing. Client letters and promotional material did not establish independent recognition. (pp. 2–4)', 'citation_pages': [1, 2, 3, 4]} |
Final-merits status | AAO concluded threshold criteria were not shown and the record did not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field recognition; no separate modern two-step final-merits analysis is identified. |
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 met — source PDF |
Membership | Not reached — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not met — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not reached — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not reached — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not reached — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not met — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not reached — source PDF |
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: {'eligible_for_narrow_comparison': True, 'fit': 'Older, heavily redacted decision; useful only for independent recognition vs self-promotional business evidence and the specific 2006 analysis.', 'caveats': 'Nonprecedent decision; compare only the precise evidence and procedural posture reviewed.'}
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
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.