AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision FEB292012_01B2203: Motion dismissed; prior decision affirmed. Review source status, procedural posture and…
Decision summary: AAO decision FEB292012_01B2203: Motion dismissed; prior decision affirmed. Motion requirements were not satisfied; AAO affirmed the prior denial. The document is a motion disposition, not a new appeal merits decision. (pp. 2–3, 12).
Source limitation: The review record contains a source hold or limitation. Read the limitation below before relying on any case detail; unresolved facts are not treated as findings.
Scope classification from review: in_scope_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | FEB292012_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | Cover prints “FEB 29 2011” (impossible calendar date); no reliable date can be assigned from the cover. Internal prior-decision date is August 19, 2010. (pp. 1–2) |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A motion to reopen and reconsider in horticulture/plant design, filed by the petitioner/employer; it concerns an earlier dismissed appeal. (pp. 2–3) |
Procedural posture | AAO dismissed the motion and affirmed its August 19, 2010 decision; petition remained denied. (pp. 2–3, 12) |
Operative disposition | Motion dismissed; prior decision affirmed. |
Final-merits status | Prior merits decision affirmed; this motion does not constitute a fresh final-merits adjudication. (pp. 2–3, 12) |
What the AAO decision addressed
Motion requirements were not satisfied; AAO affirmed the prior denial. The document is a motion disposition, not a new appeal merits decision. (pp. 2–3, 12)
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 | Not coded — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | abandoned |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — 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 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not met — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
HOLD DATE/IDENTITY METADATA: cover date is printed “FEB 29 2011,” an impossible date; decision ID suggests 2012 but is not source proof. Do not publish a normalized date until independently reconciled. Document is a motion following the August 19, 2010 prior appeal.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: If cleared after editorial review, prepare a decision-specific source-linked summary with exact procedural posture, criterion states, dated page citations, redaction preservation, and non-precedent notice where applicable. Only suitable for a procedural explainer on AAO motions and preservation of arguments; keep separate from merits-decision aggregations.
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
Open the official USCIS decision PDF. Page-specific citations were not available in the normalized row.
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
Judging the work of others research
Leading or critical role research
High salary or remuneration research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.