AAO research
EB-1A appeal timeliness — AAO decision JUN082022_01B2203: Motion to reopen dismissed; motion to reconsider dismissed. Review source status, procedural…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUN082022_01B2203: Motion to reopen dismissed; motion to reconsider dismissed. The filing was untimely and the claimed USPS flexibility did not extend the motion deadlines in the manner asserted. AAO considered the prior motion record and found no proper cause, new facts, or legal error warranting reopening/reconsideration. The decision is procedural, not a fresh eligibility adjudication.
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; verified in source review. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUN082022_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | June 8, 2022 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability; field claimed: stage acting. |
Procedural posture | Second combined motion to reopen and reconsider after prior appeal and motion decisions. |
Operative disposition | Motion to reopen dismissed; motion to reconsider dismissed. |
Final-merits status | "not reached" |
What the AAO decision addressed
The filing was untimely and the claimed USPS flexibility did not extend the motion deadlines in the manner asserted. AAO considered the prior motion record and found no proper cause, new facts, or legal error warranting reopening/reconsideration. The decision is procedural, not a fresh eligibility adjudication.
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 considered |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not coded — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not coded — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not coded — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not coded — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not coded — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
pp. 1–4; history and motion standards pp. 1–2; procedural analysis pp. 2–4; orders p. 4.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Procedural content only on motion deadlines and scope; do not treat as a new merits decision. eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations
Editorial use note: eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 1 — Cover identifies combined motion in EB-1A stage-actor case.
PDF page 2 — Summarizes original denial, prior appeal/motions, and motion standards.
PDF page 3 — Finds filing late and explanation insufficient; current filing is procedurally limited.
PDF page 4 — Explains previous merits concerns only as context; dismisses both motions.
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
Untimely research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.