AAO research
EB-1A scholarly authorship — AAO decision JUN122006_02B2203: Appeal dismissed; see cited pages. Review source status, procedural posture and the official…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUN122006_02B2203: Appeal dismissed; see cited pages. AAO dismissed, finding earlier recognition but insufficient sustained acclaim at the April 2003 filing date. It also found concerns over a concealed doping-related ban undermined credibility, intent to continue in field, and prospective U.S. benefit (pp. 3–8).
Source limitation: The review record contains a source hold or limitation. Read the limitation below before relying on any case detail; unresolved facts are not treated as findings.
Scope classification from review: in_scope_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUN122006_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | June 12, 2006 |
Classification / field stated in source | Track-and-field coach; beneficiary coached athletes in China. |
Procedural posture | Legacy AAO appeal of California Service Center denial of Form I-140. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed; see cited pages. |
Final-merits status | Reached; adverse legacy aggregate analysis. Earlier coaching recognition did not establish top-of-field status at filing; AAO separately found statutory intent-to-continue and prospective-benefit issues due to the undisclosed ban (pp. 7–8). |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO dismissed, finding earlier recognition but insufficient sustained acclaim at the April 2003 filing date. It also found concerns over a concealed doping-related ban undermined credibility, intent to continue in field, and prospective U.S. benefit (pp. 3–8).
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 met — source PDF |
Membership | Not met — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not met — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not met — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | not met |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not met — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not met — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
["Potentially sensitive factual allegations (doping-related ban); paraphrase only with clear attribution to AAO, not as an independently verified fact."]
Source-cited findings recorded in review
pp. 1–8
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Important historic athletics comparator on date-of-filing, temporal continuity, adverse information, and credibility. Since it is a legacy decision with an unusual later-acquired derogatory record, avoid treating it as a routine EB-1A checklist example. Individual source-linked historic case page with prominent date-of-filing and adverse-information context.
Editorial use note: Individual source-linked historic case page with prominent date-of-filing and adverse-information context.
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
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
Scholarly authorship research
Athletics sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.