AAO research
EB-1A membership — AAO decision FEB222005_01B2203: dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision FEB222005_01B2203: dismissed. The evidence did not establish three criteria or a one-time major award; no eligibility was shown.
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: Complete AAO decision addressing an EB-1A Form I-140 extraordinary-ability petition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | FEB222005_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2005-02-22 |
Classification / field stated in source | AAO EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition decision or motion proceeding |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial of a Form I-140 EB-1A petition; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | dismissed |
Final-merits status | The AAO concludes the required initial threshold is not met and does not undertake a distinct final-merits determination. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The evidence did not establish three criteria or a one-time major award; no eligibility was shown.
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 considered — source PDF |
Membership | Not met — p. 3 |
Published material about the person | Not considered — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not met — p. 3 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not met — p. 6 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not met — p. 6 |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — p. 6 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner was a financial analyst/economist; AAO reviewed membership, judging, original contributions, scholarly authorship, leading/critical role, and high salary. (pp. 2–7); pages: 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7
claim: The AAO found association membership did not require outstanding achievements, routine supervisory review was not regulatory judging, and the modeling work did not establish major significance beyond the employer. (pp. 3–5); pages: 3; 4; 5
claim: The AAO found authorship, distinguished-role, and comparative high-salary evidence insufficient; appeal dismissed. (pp. 6–7); pages: 6; 7
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
Commercial success in the performing arts research
Entrepreneurship sector research
Final Merits research
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.