AAO research
EB-1A final merits — AAO decision MAR012022_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision MAR012022_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
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: in_scope_procedural_eb1a_decision. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAR012022_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2022-03-01 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: Appeal of Texas Service Center denial; AAO dismissed the appeal.; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; classification: Appeal of Texas Service Center denial; AAO dismissed the appeal.; director_findings: As distinguished in the source-specific analysis and disposition. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Appeal dismissed.', 'basis': 'The petitioner was a police officer specializing in training. AAO found the one-time award claim insufficient but found the judging, leading/critical-role and high-remuneration criteria met. It concluded the evidence did not show sustained acclaim at final merits or the level of recognition required for extraordinary ability. Appeal dismissed.', 'citation_pages': [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]} |
Final-merits status | The petitioner was a police officer specializing in training. AAO found the one-time award claim insufficient but found the judging, leading/critical-role and high-remuneration criteria met. It concluded the evidence did not show sustained acclaim at final merits or the level of recognition required for extraordinary ability. Appeal dismissed. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
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 — source PDF |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not considered — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not considered — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not considered — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | met — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | met — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: {'eligible_for_narrow_comparison': True, 'fit': 'Narrow comparison for law-enforcement trainers and final merits, including the distinction between high-ranking duties, compensation and sustained recognition.', 'caveats': 'Nonprecedent and field-specific; avoid extending conclusions about public-sector rank or training duties beyond this 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
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.