AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision JUL232014_02B2203: Motion to reopen granted petition remains denied. Review source status, procedural posture and the official…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUL232014_02B2203: Motion to reopen granted petition remains denied. AAO granted reopening based on procedural error in the earlier appeal decision, then reviewed the merits de novo and concluded the petitioner did not establish three criteria; the petition remained denied.
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 EB-1A decision; source-specific procedural caveats are recorded in posture and final-merits fields.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUL232014_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | July 23, 2014 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability Form I-140 |
Procedural posture | Nonprecedent AAO decision on a motion to reopen a prior appeal; motion granted, but petition remained denied. |
Operative disposition | motion_to_reopen_granted_petition_remains_denied |
Final-merits status | The conclusion states that the initial evidence threshold was unmet and that no threshold-triggered final merits determination was necessary; the AAO nevertheless discusses aggregate evidence. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO granted reopening based on procedural error in the earlier appeal decision, then reviewed the merits de novo and concluded the petitioner did not establish three criteria; the petition remained denied.
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 met — p. 11 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not considered — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not met — p. 13 |
Leading or critical role | Not met — p. 14 |
High salary or remuneration | Not considered — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not met — p. 15 |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The record initially described a violinist; petitioner argued that the requested classification was as a musician and sought reopening after an earlier appeal dismissal.; evidence_pages: 2; 3; 4
claim: AAO considered claimed awards, membership, published material, judging, contributions, artistic display, role and commercial success.; evidence_pages: 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15
claim: The motion to reopen was granted; the petition remained denied after review of eligibility.; evidence_pages: 15; 16
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
Performance sector research
Threshold research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.