AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision MAR012006_03B2203: Appeal arguments

AAO EB-1A decision MAR012006_03B2203: Appeal arguments

EB-1A appeal arguments — AAO decision MAR012006_03B2203: Appeal summarily dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.

Decision summary: AAO decision MAR012006_03B2203: Appeal summarily dismissed. AAO found no specific legal/factual error identified. It expressly said the dance partner’s case was not before it and AAO could not determine whether the facts were substantially similar.

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_AAO_decision_no_precedent_status_asserted. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.

Decision snapshot

Decision ID

MAR012006_03B2203

Decision date as printed

March 1, 2006

Classification / field stated in source

EB-1A Form I-140; extraordinary ability in the arts

Procedural posture

Vermont Service Center denial appealed by self-represented petitioner. She asserted her dance partner had been approved on a contemporaneous petition with the same documentation and promised a brief/evidence within 30 days; none arrived after over a year.

Operative disposition

Appeal summarily dismissed.

Final-merits status

Not reached

What the AAO decision addressed

AAO found no specific legal/factual error identified. It expressly said the dance partner’s case was not before it and AAO could not determine whether the facts were substantially similar.

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 reached — source PDF

Membership

Not reached
The AAO resolved the matter on a procedural ground or mootness and did not adjudicate this criterion. — source PDF

Published material about the person

Not reached — source PDF

Judging the work of others

Not reached
The AAO resolved the matter on a procedural ground or mootness and did not adjudicate this criterion. — source PDF

Original contributions of major significance

Not reached
The AAO resolved the matter on a procedural ground or mootness and did not adjudicate this criterion. — source PDF

Scholarly authorship

Not reached
The AAO resolved the matter on a procedural ground or mootness and did not adjudicate this criterion. — source PDF

Artistic display or showcases

Not reached
The AAO resolved the matter on a procedural ground or mootness and did not adjudicate this criterion. — source PDF

Leading or critical role

Not reached
The AAO resolved the matter on a procedural ground or mootness and did not adjudicate this criterion. — source PDF

High salary or remuneration

Not reached
The AAO resolved the matter on a procedural ground or mootness and did not adjudicate this criterion. — source PDF

Commercial success in the performing arts

Not reached
The AAO resolved the matter on a procedural ground or mootness and did not adjudicate this criterion. — source PDF

Source holds and limits

status:

Specific caveats recorded by the reviewer

  • Do not state the partner’s petition is actually comparable or that same documentation was independently verified; only petitioner asserted this.

  • No criterion-level merits analysis.

Source-cited findings recorded in review

  • claim: The source cover identifies an AAO decision dated March 1, 2006.; pages: 1

  • claim: Classification/field as described in the source: EB-1A Form I-140; extraordinary ability in the arts.; pages: 2

  • claim: Vermont Service Center denial appealed by self-represented petitioner. She asserted her dance partner had been approved on a contemporaneous petition with the same documentation and promised a brief/evidence within 30 days; none arrived after over a year.; pages: 2

  • claim: AAO found no specific legal/factual error identified. It expressly said the dance partner’s case was not before it and AAO could not determine whether the facts were substantially similar.; pages: 2

  • claim: Operative order: Appeal summarily dismissed.; pages: 2

How this record may be used in research

Comparison scope: narrow_procedural_explainer_only

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

  • Membership 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

  • Summary Dismissal research

Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.

Primary source

Official USCIS AAO decision PDF for MAR012006_03B2203