AAO research
EB-1A motions to reopen — AAO decision JUN162009_06B2203: Motion to reopen dismissed; petition remains denied. Review source status, procedural posture…
Decision summary: AAO decision JUN162009_06B2203: Motion to reopen dismissed; petition remains denied. 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 | JUN162009_06B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2009-06-16 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: Motion to reopen following denial of an EB-1A petition; AAO dismissed the motion.; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; classification: Motion to reopen following denial of an EB-1A petition; AAO dismissed the motion.; director_findings: As distinguished in source-specific disposition and basis. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Motion to reopen dismissed; petition remains denied.', 'basis': 'AAO reviewed the ineffective-assistance claim under Matter of Lozada and concluded the petitioner did not satisfy all procedural requirements, including a proper affidavit and notice/opportunity for former counsel to respond. The motion did not reopen merits eligibility.', 'citation_pages': [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]} |
Final-merits status | AAO reviewed the ineffective-assistance claim under Matter of Lozada and concluded the petitioner did not satisfy all procedural requirements, including a proper affidavit and notice/opportunity for former counsel to respond. The motion did not reopen merits eligibility. |
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 considered — source PDF |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not considered — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not considered — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not considered — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not considered — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not considered — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not considered — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: {'eligible_for_narrow_comparison': True, 'fit': 'Procedural explainer only on motion requirements for ineffective-assistance claims; exclude from criterion and outcome aggregates.', 'caveats': 'Highly redacted procedural matter. Not a substantive EB-1A criteria decision.'}
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.