AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision JUN282005_03B2203: dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision JUN282005_03B2203: dismissed. Only one regulatory criterion was met; the petitioner did not establish the three-criterion threshold or sustained acclaim.
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: Complete AAO decision addressing an EB-1A Form I-140 extraordinary-ability petition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | JUN282005_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2005-06-28 |
Classification / field stated in source | AAO EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition decision or motion proceeding |
Procedural posture | Appeal of California Service Center denial of a Form I-140 EB-1A petition; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | dismissed |
Final-merits status | The decision finds only one regulatory criterion and expressly denies threshold eligibility; its final discussion is not a separate final-merits approval. |
What the AAO decision addressed
Only one regulatory criterion was met; the petitioner did not establish the three-criterion threshold or sustained acclaim.
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 — p. 3 |
Membership | |
Published material about the person | Not considered — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not considered — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not considered — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
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 AAO considered the petitioner’s packaging inventions, awards, association membership, original contributions, and leading/critical role. (pp. 2–7); pages: 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7
claim: The AAO accepted one criterion—awards—based on packaging-design awards, but found membership, original contribution, and leading/critical role unestablished. (pp. 3–7); pages: 3; 4; 5; 6; 7
claim: The record did not show a one-time major achievement or three criteria, nor sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing; appeal dismissed. (p. 7); 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
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
Threshold research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.