AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision JUN132022_02B2203: Motion to reopen dismissed and motion to reconsider dismissed; petition remains denied (physical p. 6).…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUN132022_02B2203: Motion to reopen dismissed and motion to reconsider dismissed; petition remains denied (physical p. 6). Prior decisions had found acclaim as an athlete did not establish sustained acclaim in coaching. The motion did not establish new evidence/proper cause showing acclaim and recognition as a coach; reconsideration did not show material error in the prior decision. The AAO noted only the awards criterion had been met in the underlying evidentiary analysis; other claimed criteria were unnecessary to reach once threshold count was met, while the final-merits conclusion remained adverse (pp. 2–6).
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_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUN132022_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | June 13, 2022 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A athletics; petitioner was a competitive athlete and sought to continue as a coach; combined motion following prior appeal dismissal. |
Procedural posture | Combined motion to reopen and reconsider an earlier AAO appeal dismissal. It addresses whether new facts or legal error warrant disturbing the prior result; not a fresh de novo petition adjudication. |
Operative disposition | Motion to reopen dismissed and motion to reconsider dismissed; petition remains denied (physical p. 6). |
Final-merits status | Previously reached in the underlying proceeding and adverse as to sustained acclaim; this motion decision does not conduct a fresh full final-merits review. It explains athlete acclaim did not show sustained acclaim as a coach (pp. 3–5). |
What the AAO decision addressed
Prior decisions had found acclaim as an athlete did not establish sustained acclaim in coaching. The motion did not establish new evidence/proper cause showing acclaim and recognition as a coach; reconsideration did not show material error in the prior decision. The AAO noted only the awards criterion had been met in the underlying evidentiary analysis; other claimed criteria were unnecessary to reach once threshold count was met, while the final-merits conclusion remained adverse (pp. 2–6).
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 |
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
Citations use physical PDF page numbers; pages were visually inspected in source order.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Motion-procedure/field-transition example: athlete-to-coach acclaim and motions cannot substitute for fresh eligibility evidence. Pair only with the underlying AAO appeal if independently identified; do not count as an independent initial petition merits case. Publish only as clearly labeled combined motion, with a prominent link/cross-reference to underlying 2021 appeal decision if located.
Editorial use note: Publish only as clearly labeled combined motion, with a prominent link/cross-reference to underlying 2021 appeal decision if located.
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
Awards research
Athletics sector research
Threshold research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.