AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision DEC292014_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed The petitioner established no qualifying one-time award or three criteria. The AAO found published-material, original-contribution, authorship, and comparable-evidence claims insufficient; numerous other criteria were abandoned.
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: Decision identifies an extraordinary-ability Form I-140 petition under INA § 203(b)(1)(A). (pp. 1–2). This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | DEC292014_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | December 29, 2014 |
Classification / field stated in source | Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability appeal decision. |
Procedural posture | Appeal of service-center denial; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | The initial three-criterion threshold was not met. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The petitioner established no qualifying one-time award or three criteria. The AAO found published-material, original-contribution, authorship, and comparable-evidence claims insufficient; numerous other criteria were abandoned.
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 | abandoned — p. 4 |
Membership | abandoned — p. 4 |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | abandoned — p. 4 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not met — p. 6 |
Artistic display or showcases | abandoned — p. 4 |
Leading or critical role | abandoned — p. 4 |
High salary or remuneration | abandoned — p. 4 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner abandoned several claimed criteria and focused on published material, contributions, scholarly authorship, and comparable evidence.; pages: 4; 7
claim: A patent-page listing was not published material about the petitioner.; pages: 4; 5
claim: A pending patent and USPTO cited references did not establish major significance; the decision also construed the contributions criterion’s plural language as requiring more than one contribution.; pages: 5; 6
claim: Claimed scholarly material was not submitted in a form that established authorship; comparable evidence was not justified because the criteria applied and inability to meet them was insufficient.; pages: 6; 7
claim: The initial three-criterion threshold was not met; formal final merits was not reached and the appeal was dismissed.; pages: 8
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible for individual case discussion
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
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
Membership research
Published material about the person research
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Artistic display or showcases research
Leading or critical role research
High salary or remuneration research
Entrepreneurship sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.