AAO research
EB-1A motion disposition — AAO decision JUL252012_02B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision JUL252012_02B2203: 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 | JUL252012_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2012-07-25 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: Appeal from denial. Director had conducted final-merits review and found insufficient acclaim; petitioner argued original contributions and leadership.; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; 4; classification: AAO appeal or motion as described in source; director_findings: Appeal from denial. Director had conducted final-merits review and found insufficient acclaim; petitioner argued original contributions and leadership. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Appeal dismissed.', 'basis': 'Petitioner did not establish original contributions, membership, published material, display, or leading/critical role; counsel did not adequately identify error and other findings were abandoned. (pp. 2–4)', 'citation_pages': [1, 2, 3, 4]} |
Final-merits status | Director’s final-merits determination that sustained acclaim/top-of-field were not established was not adequately challenged; AAO relied on it. (p. 4) |
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 | Abandoned or waived — 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 | Abandoned or waived — 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': 'Narrow fit for criterion-specific evidence and appeal abandonment in a performing-arts record.', 'caveats': 'Nonprecedent and fact-specific; preserve the actual procedural posture and avoid expanding criterion findings.'}
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.