AAO research
EB-1A original contributions of major significance — AAO decision JUN182015_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the…
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed The petitioner did not respond to an RFE seeking evidence for the original-contributions claim, a comparable-display claim, and final acclaim in the broader pipe-organ-building field. AAO found leading/critical role met, original contributions not met, and proposed comparable display evidence insufficient; threshold/comparable evidence was not established.
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: The source is an AAO EB-1A petition appeal and contains decision-specific procedural and evidentiary analysis.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUN182015_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | June 18, 2015 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition appeal |
Procedural posture | EB-1A appeal; dismissed as abandoned and, alternatively, on the merits. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | AAO expressly did not proceed to final merits because the antecedent criteria/comparable-evidence threshold was unmet; appeal was dismissed as abandoned and alternatively on merits. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The petitioner did not respond to an RFE seeking evidence for the original-contributions claim, a comparable-display claim, and final acclaim in the broader pipe-organ-building field. AAO found leading/critical role met, original contributions not met, and proposed comparable display evidence insufficient; threshold/comparable evidence was not established.
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 coded — source PDF |
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 | |
Scholarly authorship | Not coded — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not met — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | met — p. 6 |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: Petitioner sought classification as a reed voicer; after reviewing the work, AAO described the broader field as pipe-organ building and gave a detailed RFE for additional evidence.; pages: 2; 3
claim: Petitioner did not respond to the RFE; AAO dismissed the appeal for abandonment and alternatively reviewed the existing record.; pages: 3; 4
claim: Reference letters showed skill and respect but did not specify an original contribution or field influence; a temperature-fluctuation issue during a South Korean organ installation was left without requested details.; pages: 4; 5
claim: AAO found a leading/critical role for an organ-building company with a distinguished reputation, based on the petitioner’s reed-voicing work on its organs and evidence of the company’s reputation.; pages: 6
claim: Programs/articles about organ dedication recitals and recordings did not credit the petitioner by name; AAO found they were not comparable to artistic exhibitions/showcases.; pages: 6; 7
claim: AAO concluded the one-time award, three regular criteria, or comparable-evidence threshold had not been met and did not reach formal final merits.; pages: 7
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible for individual case discussion
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
Original contributions of major significance research
Leading or critical role research
Threshold research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.