AAO research
EB-1A published material about the person — AAO decision MAR152022_02B2203: Director’s decision withdrawn; matter remanded for further proceedings and a…
Decision summary: The AAO director’s decision withdrawn; matter Remanded for further proceedings and a new decision. The Director did not provide sufficient criterion-by-criterion analysis of submitted evidence (including awards, published material, judging/authorship/original contributions as claimed). AAO does not resolve eligibility or final merits on this record and remands.
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_EB1A. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAR152022_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | March 15, 2022 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability; appeal sustained and matter Remanded |
Procedural posture | Appeal of EB-1A denial; AAO finds Director’s decision did not adequately analyze the evidentiary criteria and withdraws/remands for a new decision. |
Operative disposition | Director’s decision withdrawn; matter Remanded for further proceedings and a new decision. |
Final-merits status | Not reached; remand for adequate initial evidentiary analysis |
What the AAO decision addressed
The Director did not provide sufficient criterion-by-criterion analysis of submitted evidence (including awards, published material, judging/authorship/original contributions as claimed). AAO does not resolve eligibility or final merits on this record and remands.
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 | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | unclear |
Judging the work of others | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not coded — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
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-cited findings recorded in review
claim: AAO describes an EB-1A appeal involving an academic/anatomist.; pages: 1
claim: The record includes claims/evidence across awards, publications/authorship, judging, and contributions.; pages: 2; 3
claim: AAO concludes the Director’s analysis is insufficient and requires a new reasoned determination.; pages: 3; 4
claim: AAO withdraws the decision and remands; eligibility/final merits are not decided.; pages: 4
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: eligible_procedural_context_only
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
PDF page 1 — Cover, petitioner, and appeal disposition posture.
PDF page 3 — Claims/evidence and AAO discussion of inadequate Director analysis.
PDF page 4 — Conclusion/order withdrawing decision and remanding.
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
Published material about the person research
Medicine sector research
Teaching sector research
Final Merits research
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.