AAO research
EB-1A motion disposition — AAO decision JUN082007_02B2203: Appeal sustained; petition approved. Review source status, procedural posture and the official…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUN082007_02B2203: 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 | JUN082007_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | Not stated in normalized review fields |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: Appeal from denial; petitioner had developed a dispatch-service architecture/framework with evidence of industry adoption and endorsements.; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; classification: AAO appeal or motion as described in source; director_findings: Appeal from denial; petitioner had developed a dispatch-service architecture/framework with evidence of industry adoption and endorsements. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Appeal sustained; petition approved.', 'basis': 'AAO found the innovation was original and majorly significant based on deployment/adoption, independent testimonials and evidence of industry use; approval sustained. (pp. 3–5)', 'citation_pages': [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]} |
Final-merits status | AAO found sustained acclaim/distinction based on innovation and recognized use in field. (pp. 3–5) |
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 | met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not reached — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | 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': 'Strong historic comparison for technical innovation supported by independent adoption, carrier usage and field testimonials; verify exact field facts before grouping.', 'caveats': 'Nonprecedent and fact-specific; preserve posture and only use directly supported 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.