AAO research
EB-1A motions to reopen — AAO decision JUL032024_04B2203: Motion to reopen dismissed; motion to reconsider dismissed. Review source status, procedural…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUL032024_04B2203: Motion to reopen dismissed; motion to reconsider dismissed. The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
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_procedural_eb1a_decision. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUL032024_04B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2024-07-03 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: Nonprecedent combined motion after appeal dismissal. The underlying Director decision found the artistic-display criterion satisfied but denied on other criteria. In the current motion, petitioner argued membership, judging, and high salary. AAO found no new facts or documentary evidence meeting the motion requirements; the UNITEM membership materials did not show outstanding achievements required for membership, the prior judging evidence deficiencies were not addressed, and the high-salary claim lacked comparative documentation for the field/occupation.; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; classification: combined_motion_reopen_reconsider_dismissed; director_findings: Nonprecedent combined motion after appeal dismissal. The underlying Director decision found the artistic-display criterion satisfied but denied on other criteria. In the current motion, petitioner argued membership, judging, and high salary. AAO found no new facts or documentary evidence meeting the motion requirements; the UNITEM membership materials did not show outstanding achievements required for membership, the prior judging evidence deficiencies were not addressed, and the high-salary claim lacked comparative documentation for the field/occupation. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Motion to reopen dismissed; motion to reconsider dismissed.', 'basis': 'The motion repeated prior arguments and did not provide qualifying new evidence or show error in the previous decision; the cited membership, judging, and salary evidence did not resolve prior deficiencies.', 'citation_pages': [1, 2, 3]} |
Final-merits status | Not reached |
What the AAO decision addressed
The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
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 reached — source PDF |
Membership | Not met — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not reached — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not met — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not reached — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not reached — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not reached — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not reached — source PDF |
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: {'fit': 'makeup_artist_membership_judging_salary_motion', 'aggregation_valid': True, 'use': 'Useful source for criterion-specific discussion of membership, judging, and salary, but only as a motion ruling and not a new comprehensive merits decision; one prior display finding is recited.', 'do_not_claim': ['Do not characterize a procedural dismissal, rejection, or remand as approval or a completed merits adjudication.', 'Do not infer criterion outcomes beyond those expressly stated.', 'Do not treat explicitly nonprecedent decisions as binding authority.', 'Keep EB-5 and EB-1B/NIW records out of EB-1A content and comparisons.'], 'caveat': 'Use only narrow findings in the cited pages and disclose historical context; exclude non-EB-1A records from EB-1A landing pages and analytics.'}
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
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.