AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision JUN242016_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision JUN242016_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. AAO found the claimed awards, membership, published material, judging, contributions, and scholarly authorship insufficient; fewer than three initial criteria were established. (pp. 3–12).
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 | JUN242016_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | June 24, 2016 |
Classification / field stated in source | Non-precedent EB-1A appeal; beneficiary is a television presenter/producer. (pp. 1–2) |
Procedural posture | Appeal from denial; AAO dismissed and withdrew the director’s favorable judging finding. (pp. 1–2, 8–12) |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed. |
Final-merits status | Aggregate analysis considered the totality and found eligibility/top-of-field not established; AAO stated it need not conduct a separate Kazarian-style final-merits analysis absent three criteria. (p. 12) |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found the claimed awards, membership, published material, judging, contributions, and scholarly authorship insufficient; fewer than three initial criteria were established. (pp. 3–12)
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 |
Membership | not met |
Published material about the person | Not met — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | not met |
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 coded — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
Petitioner identity is redacted; source labels the decision non-precedent.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: If cleared after editorial review, prepare a decision-specific source-linked summary with exact procedural posture, criterion states, dated page citations, redaction preservation, and non-precedent notice where applicable. Possible television-host comparison on independent award recognition and judging; non-precedent, redacted, and specific to the source record.
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
Awards research
Membership research
Judging the work of others research
Scholarly authorship research
Performance sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.