AAO research
EB-1A withdrawal and mootness — AAO decision JUL272012_01B2203: Director decision withdrawn; appeal sustained; petition approved. Review source status…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUL272012_01B2203: Director decision withdrawn; appeal sustained; petition approved. 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 | JUL272012_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2012-07-27 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: AAO appeal of Texas Service Center denial; appeal sustained and petition approved; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; classification: AAO appeal of Texas Service Center denial; appeal sustained and petition approved; director_findings: See decision-specific basis; AAO findings distinguished from Director findings. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Director decision withdrawn; appeal sustained; petition approved.', 'basis': 'AAO found the petitioner demonstrated the required evidence and sustained acclaim as a professional race-car driver, meeting at least three criteria and the final-merits standard.', 'citation_pages': [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]} |
Final-merits status | AAO concluded the petitioner established extraordinary ability; appeal sustained and petition approved. |
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 | met — source PDF |
Membership | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | met — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: {'eligible_for_narrow_comparison': True, 'fit': 'Potential narrow professional auto-racing comparison; verify precise criterion mappings before publishing a detailed criterion-specific page.', 'caveats': 'Nonprecedent, fact-specific decision; remands and procedural motions are not approvals. Exclude motion decisions from substantive merits aggregation. Older decisions require legal-temporal context.'}
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
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.