AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision JAN212011_03B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed One criterion (awards) was accepted; the remaining discussed criteria failed. The expressly labeled final-merits analysis also found the petitioner had not shown the required acclaim/expertise.
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: Source is an AAO decision involving an EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JAN212011_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | January 21, 2011 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability (Form I-140) |
Procedural posture | AAO appeal from Nebraska Service Center denial of an EB-1A Form I-140. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | The AAO expressly conducts a Final Merits Determination after finding fewer than three criteria; it concludes the total record does not show sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing. |
What the AAO decision addressed
One criterion (awards) was accepted; the remaining discussed criteria failed. The expressly labeled final-merits analysis also found the petitioner had not shown the required acclaim/expertise.
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 | |
Membership | |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | Not considered — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — p. 8 |
Scholarly authorship | Not considered — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not met — p. 8 |
Leading or critical role | Not met — p. 9 |
High salary or remuneration | Not considered — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner initially submitted evidence of past activity as a tennis player and later provided evidence of prospective employment as a coach; the AAO discussed the distinction between playing and coaching.; evidence_pages: 2; 5
claim: The AAO accepted awards, but rejected membership, published material, original contributions, artistic display, and leading/critical role.; evidence_pages: 5; 6; 7; 8; 9
claim: The AAO conducted an expressly labeled final-merits determination and dismissed the appeal.; evidence_pages: 9; 10; 11
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible with caveats
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
Athletics sector research
Threshold research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.