AAO research
EB-1A motions to reopen — AAO decision JUN042018_01B2203: Motion to reopen denied because it repeated prior arguments and did not assert new facts to be…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUN042018_01B2203: Motion to reopen denied because it repeated prior arguments and did not assert new facts to be proved in reopened proceedings. 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.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUN042018_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2018-06-04 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: Motion to reopen after a prior appeal dismissal. The motion repeated arguments from the prior appeal, the brief was substantially identical, and no new facts to be proved on reopening were asserted. AAO denied the motion.; citation_pages: 1; classification: motion_to_reopen_denied_no_new_facts; director_findings: The Director denied the underlying petition; the page does not restate the initial criterion analysis. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Motion to reopen denied because it repeated prior arguments and did not assert new facts to be proved in reopened proceedings.', 'basis': 'AAO cites 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(2), describes the repeated brief/no new facts, and orders that the motion to reopen is denied.', 'citation_pages': [1]} |
Final-merits status | Not reached |
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 reached — source PDF |
Membership | Not reached — 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 reached — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not reached — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not reached — 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: {'fit': 'motion_to_reopen_no_new_facts', 'use': 'May be grouped with decisions sharing this same procedural disposition, with case-specific dates, motion history, and factual basis preserved.', 'do_not_claim': ['Do not characterize this as a merits adjudication of any EB-1A criterion or final merits.', 'Do not infer criterion-level findings from the Director denial or from the procedural dismissal.', 'Do not treat this nonprecedent individual decision as binding authority.'], 'caveat': 'AAO’s disposition is narrow and procedural; it does not establish the underlying EB-1A merits.'}
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
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.