AAO research
EB-1A remand — AAO decision JUL162018_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision JUL162018_01B2203: Appeal 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 | JUL162018_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2018-07-16 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: Appeal from denial of Form I-140 EB-1A petition.; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; classification: Appeal from denial of Form I-140 EB-1A petition.; director_findings: Only as described in the decision; underlying merits are not inferred for motion or remand outcomes. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Appeal dismissed.', 'basis': 'The decision discusses claims involving awards, published material, original contributions, authorship and leading/critical role. The record did not establish the required initial-evidence threshold; AAO dismissed without reaching final merits.', 'citation_pages': [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]} |
Final-merits status | The AAO concludes the initial-evidence threshold was not met; final merits analysis is unnecessary. |
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 considered — source PDF |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not met — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not considered — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not met — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not met — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not considered — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: {'eligible_for_narrow_comparison': True, 'fit': 'Narrow comparison for technology professionals asserting original contributions and authorship, subject to date-specific standard and record-specific evidence.', 'caveats': 'Nonprecedent denial; not a categorical rule about blockchain professionals.'}
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
Threshold research
Final Merits research
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.