AAO research
EB-1A motions to reopen — AAO decision JUL102012_01B2203: Motion to reopen dismissed; motion to reconsider dismissed; prior decision affirmed. Review…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUL102012_01B2203: Motion to reopen dismissed; motion to reconsider dismissed; prior decision affirmed. 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 | JUL102012_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2012-07-10 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: Combined motion after prior appeal dismissal. Petitioner repeated challenges to prior findings on contributions, membership, published material, display, and leading role.; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; 4; classification: AAO appeal/motion as described in source; director_findings: Combined motion after prior appeal dismissal. Petitioner repeated challenges to prior findings on contributions, membership, published material, display, and leading role. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Motion to reopen dismissed; motion to reconsider dismissed; prior decision affirmed.', 'basis': 'Motion lacked required judicial-proceedings statement and did not show new evidence or legal error; repeated disagreement with prior evidence analysis was insufficient. (pp. 2–4)', 'citation_pages': [1, 2, 3, 4]} |
Final-merits status | Motion decision affirmed prior denial; no fresh final-merits review. |
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 reached — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not reached — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not met — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not reached — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not reached — source PDF |
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: {'eligible_for_narrow_comparison': True, 'fit': 'Procedural motion comparison only; does not add new merits analysis.', 'caveats': 'Nonprecedent, fact-specific decision. Preserve posture and individual evidence; do not aggregate as a generalized rule.'}
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
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.