AAO research
EB-1A leading or critical role — AAO decision FEB162022_01B2203: Appeal dismissed (pp. 1, 7). Review source status, procedural posture and the official…
Decision summary: AAO decision FEB162022_01B2203: Appeal dismissed (pp. 1, 7). AAO found published material, judging and display criteria met, but concluded the totality showed a short period of national attention and did not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field status. Film/theater roles, festivals, judging, award and commercial claims did not establish the necessary broader acclaim. (pp. 1–7).
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 | FEB162022_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | February 16, 2022 |
Classification / field stated in source | Nepali actor who also directed, adapted, translated and produced theater/film work. |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Texas Service Center denial; Director found three initial criteria met but denied at final merits; AAO dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed (pp. 1, 7). |
Final-merits status | Reached; adverse. AAO recognized positive national reviews for certain theater work but found activity concentrated over a brief period, with no sustained national/international acclaim or top-of-field standing (pp. 4–7). |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found published material, judging and display criteria met, but concluded the totality showed a short period of national attention and did not establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field status. Film/theater roles, festivals, judging, award and commercial claims did not establish the necessary broader acclaim. (pp. 1–7)
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 | met — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met — 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 |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not met — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
pp. 1–7
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Strong performing-arts comparator for the distinction between meeting three criteria and passing final merits; useful evidence on press coverage, judging, festival display, and limits of short-duration acclaim. Individual case page and a final-merits explainer grounded in this record; make clear it is a nonprecedent decision.
Editorial use note: Individual case page and a final-merits explainer grounded in this record; make clear it is a nonprecedent decision.
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
Leading or critical role research
Performance sector research
Final Merits research
Translat research
Coverage research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.