AAO research
EB-1A published material about the person — AAO decision JUN242015_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official…
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed One criterion met (published material); artistic display and leading-role claims fail. Appeal dismissed at the initial evidentiary stage.
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 decision concerning an EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUN242015_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | June 24, 2015 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability (Form I-140) |
Procedural posture | Nonprecedent AAO appeal from denial of an EB-1A Form I-140. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | Only published material is established; the three-criterion gate failed and AAO did not reach final merits. |
What the AAO decision addressed
One criterion met (published material); artistic display and leading-role claims fail. Appeal dismissed at the initial evidentiary stage.
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 | met — p. 4 |
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 met — p. 4 |
Leading or critical role | |
High salary or remuneration | Not considered — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner sought classification as a musician and relied on published coverage and work with two bands.; evidence_pages: 2; 4; 5; 6; 7
claim: AAO accepted published material, rejected artistic display because the petitioner was not a visual artist, and rejected leading/critical role because the bands’ distinguished reputation was not established.; evidence_pages: 4; 5; 6; 7; 8
claim: AAO states fewer than three criteria were met; appeal dismissed without a formal final-merits determination.; evidence_pages: 2; 9
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible with caveats
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
Membership research
Published material about the person research
Judging the work of others research
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Artistic display or showcases research
Leading or critical role research
High salary or remuneration research
Commercial success in the performing arts research
Performance sector research
Revocation research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.