AAO research
EB-1A membership — AAO decision JAN272025_02B2203: Appeal dismissed (p. 5). Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision JAN272025_02B2203: Appeal dismissed (p. 5). AAO declined to consider a new membership claim raised only on appeal; in any event, record failed to establish membership, original contributions of major significance, and high salary/remuneration. Judging criterion was met. Leading/critical role was reserved because threshold of three was not met. Final merits was not reached as a formal determination, though aggregate evidence did not show acclaim (pp. 2-5).
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 | JAN272025_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | January 27, 2025 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability; petitioner identifies as a massage therapist and claims an adaptive technique combining traditional Thai massage with modern therapeutic procedures (pp. 2-3). |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial; petitioner raised membership for the first time on appeal and argued several criteria (pp. 1-2). |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed (p. 5). |
Final-merits status | Not coded in the normalized review fields |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO declined to consider a new membership claim raised only on appeal; in any event, record failed to establish membership, original contributions of major significance, and high salary/remuneration. Judging criterion was met. Leading/critical role was reserved because threshold of three was not met. Final merits was not reached as a formal determination, though aggregate evidence did not show acclaim (pp. 2-5).
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 met |
Published material about the person | Not coded — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | not met |
Scholarly authorship | Not coded — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | not reached |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
"Current source redacts name and other details; do not infer identity, employers or technique impact beyond source."
Source-cited findings recorded in review
p1: Appeal cover; petitioner and EB-1A posture; appeal dismissal announced.; p2: Standards; membership criterion newly raised on appeal, not considered as new eligibility claim and insufficient even if considered.; p3: Original-contribution analysis of claimed Thai massage/adaptive technique; evidence unidentified/unsupported.; p4: Salary evidence deficient; judging met; membership/original contributions/salary not met; leading-role issue reserved.; p5: Aggregate acclaim discussion; final merits not reached; appeal dismissed.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Good source for evidence organization and appeal preservation: identify documents precisely, connect each document to the criterion, and compare salary against the actual occupation. Novel technique alone did not establish field impact. Eligible for an evidence-focused negative summary; clearly state that judging was met while three other criteria failed and leading role was reserved.
Editorial use note: Eligible for an evidence-focused negative summary; clearly state that judging was met while three other criteria failed and leading role was reserved.
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 1 — Appeal cover; petitioner and EB-1A posture; appeal dismissal announced.
PDF page 5 — Aggregate acclaim discussion; final merits not reached; appeal dismissed.
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
Membership research
Original contributions of major significance research
Leading or critical role research
Threshold research
Final Merits research
Major Significance research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.