AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision FEB262021_05B2203: Published material about the person

AAO EB-1A decision FEB262021_05B2203: Published material about the person

EB-1A published material about the person — AAO decision FEB262021_05B2203: Appeal dismissed (physical p. 6). Review source status, procedural posture and…

Decision summary: AAO decision FEB262021_05B2203: Appeal dismissed (physical p. 6). Although four threshold criteria were found, AAO’s explicit final-merits review found sparse media, two judging events seven years apart, executive-role evidence limited to employers rather than field recognition, and salary evidence insufficient to establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field. AAO therefore did not reach intent-to-continue-work or prospective-benefit issues (pp. 2–6).

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

FEB262021_05B2203

Decision date as printed

February 26, 2021

Classification / field stated in source

EB-1A appeal; business-development specialist and company executive.

Procedural posture

Appeal of Texas Service Center denial; director found published material, judging, leading/critical role and high salary; AAO conducted final merits and dismissed.

Operative disposition

Appeal dismissed (physical p. 6).

Final-merits status

Reached and adverse: explicit “B. Final Merits Determination”; AAO found no sustained national/international acclaim or top-of-field standing despite four threshold criteria (pp. 3–6).

What the AAO decision addressed

Although four threshold criteria were found, AAO’s explicit final-merits review found sparse media, two judging events seven years apart, executive-role evidence limited to employers rather than field recognition, and salary evidence insufficient to establish sustained acclaim/top-of-field. AAO therefore did not reach intent-to-continue-work or prospective-benefit issues (pp. 2–6).

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 coded — source PDF

Membership

Not coded — source PDF

Published material about the person

met
Director found criterion met; AAO evaluated the media evidence at final merits but did not withdraw the threshold finding (p. 2). — source PDF

Judging the work of others

met
Director found criterion met; AAO’s final-merits discussion treats judging evidence as two events seven years apart (pp. 2, 4). — 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

met
Director found criterion met; AAO evaluates executive roles at final merits but does not withdraw the initial finding (p. 2). — source PDF

High salary or remuneration

met
Director found criterion met; AAO discusses remuneration at final merits and finds it insufficient to establish top-of-field acclaim (pp. 2, 5). — source PDF

Commercial success in the performing arts

Not coded — source PDF

Source-cited findings recorded in review

  • Citations refer to physical PDF page numbers. Every page was visually inspected in source order.

How this record may be used in research

Comparison scope: Useful case on executive evidence: four threshold criteria may be insufficient when media, judging, leadership and salary do not show field-wide recognition at final merits. Potential individual page; distinguish four threshold findings from adverse final merits and reserved statutory issues.

Editorial use note: Potential individual page; distinguish four threshold findings from adverse final merits and reserved statutory issues.

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

  • Published material about the person research

  • Judging the work of others research

  • Leading or critical role research

  • High salary or remuneration research

  • Entrepreneurship sector research

  • Threshold research

  • Final Merits research

Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.

Primary source

Official USCIS AAO decision PDF for FEB262021_05B2203