AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision JUL242024_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed Two criteria were met, below the required three; formal final merits were not reached.
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: The source decision identifies an EB-1A Form I-140 petition under INA §203(b)(1)(A).. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUL242024_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2024-07-24 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability under INA §203(b)(1)(A) |
Procedural posture | AAO appeal of EB-1A denial; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | Two criteria were met, below the required three; formal final merits were not reached. |
What the AAO decision addressed
Two criteria were met, below the required three; formal final merits were not reached.
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 | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | met — p. 4 |
Judging the work of others | Not considered — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — p. 5 |
Scholarly authorship | Not considered — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | met — p. 2 |
Leading or critical role | |
High salary or remuneration | abandoned — p. 2 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner sought classification as a visual artist and asserted multiple criteria.; pages: 1; 2
claim: The AAO accepted the Director’s finding that artistic display was met.; pages: 2
claim: The high-salary claim was not pursued on appeal and was treated as abandoned.; pages: 2
claim: Awards evidence did not establish a qualifying award for excellence in the field.; pages: 3; 4
claim: The AAO found the published-material criterion met based on qualifying coverage, reversing the Director on that issue.; pages: 4
claim: The record did not establish original contributions of major significance or a leading/critical role for distinguished organizations.; pages: 5; 6; 7
claim: Two criteria were met; appeal dismissed without a distinct final-merits stage.; pages: 7; 8
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible for individual case discussion
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
Final Merits research
Waiv research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.