AAO research
EB-1A appeal disposition — AAO decision JAN112013_03B2203: Appeal rejected as improperly filed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official…
Decision summary: AAO decision JAN112013_03B2203: Appeal rejected as improperly filed. No merits review; no authorized representative. Alternative brief did not specify error.
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; verified in source review. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JAN112013_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | January 11, 2013 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability. |
Procedural posture | Appeal rejected because attorney lacked current executed G-28; alternative summary-dismissal basis stated. |
Operative disposition | Appeal rejected as improperly filed. |
Final-merits status | not reached |
What the AAO decision addressed
No merits review; no authorized representative. Alternative brief did not specify error.
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 |
Membership | not considered |
Published material about the person | not considered |
Judging the work of others | not considered |
Original contributions of major significance | not considered |
Scholarly authorship | not considered |
Artistic display or showcases | not considered |
Leading or critical role | not considered |
High salary or remuneration | not considered |
Commercial success in the performing arts | not considered |
Source holds and limits
["Public copy contains privacy redactions; avoid personal data."]
Specific caveats recorded by the reviewer
Public copy contains privacy redactions; avoid personal data.
Source-cited findings recorded in review
Appeal rejected; filing and G-28 rules. (PDF p. 2)
Explains affected-party standing and current G-28 requirement. (PDF p. 3)
No response to request; appeal rejected; alternative summary dismissal for no specific error. (PDF p. 4)
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Group only by specific procedural or criterion issue; do not treat remand as approval.
Editorial use note: Eligible for carefully scoped, cited content; state exact posture and nonprecedent status.
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
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.