AAO research
EB-1A three-criterion threshold — AAO decision FEB042005_01B2203: Appeal dismissed (pp. 2, 7). Review source status, procedural posture and the official…
Decision summary: AAO decision FEB042005_01B2203: Appeal dismissed (pp. 2, 7). AAO distinguished prior competitive-dancer achievement from the proposed coaching/director occupation, then found the submitted evidence insufficient under the addressed awards, published-material, leading/critical-role, and high-salary criteria; the petitioner did not establish three criteria or sustained acclaim (pp. 3–7).
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_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | FEB042005_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | February 4, 2005 |
Classification / field stated in source | Professional ballroom dancer whose proposed U.S. work was as a dance director, coach, and choreographer. |
Procedural posture | Appeal from denial of Form I-140; legacy AAO decision. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed (pp. 2, 7). |
Final-merits status | No separate Kazarian final-merits framework; legacy decision concludes the record did not establish at least three criteria, sustained acclaim, or top-of-field standing (pp. 6–7). |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO distinguished prior competitive-dancer achievement from the proposed coaching/director occupation, then found the submitted evidence insufficient under the addressed awards, published-material, leading/critical-role, and high-salary criteria; the petitioner did not establish three criteria or sustained acclaim (pp. 3–7).
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 coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not met — 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 met — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
pp. 2–7
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Strong narrow historical comparator for the distinction between competitive athlete and coach/choreographer and for evidence about professional versus amateur awards, media, role, and salary. Clearly label as legacy 2005 analysis. Individual source-linked historic case summary; eligible for carefully dated dancer-to-coach comparisons.
Editorial use note: Individual source-linked historic case summary; eligible for carefully dated dancer-to-coach comparisons.
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
Athletics sector research
Performance sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.