AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision MAR192009_06B2203: AAO dismissed. (pp. 1–2, 13). Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision MAR192009_06B2203: AAO dismissed. (pp. 1–2, 13). The AAO found the evidence insufficient across the criteria, including awards, published material, judging, contributions, authorship, display, role, and salary. (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 | MAR192009_06B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | March 19, 2009 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A petition in architecture; petitioner claimed architectural design/research work and submitted academic articles, exhibits, and project materials. (pp. 1–3, 8–11) |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial; AAO dismissed. (pp. 1–2, 13) |
Operative disposition | AAO dismissed. (pp. 1–2, 13) |
Final-merits status | AAO concluded the petitioner did not establish sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing; the initial-evidence threshold was not met. (pp. 12–13) |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO found the evidence insufficient across the criteria, including awards, published material, judging, contributions, authorship, display, role, and salary. (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 coded — source PDF |
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 met |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
No identity/completeness hold.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: If editorially cleared, create a source-linked summary that accurately names the procedural posture and order, distinguishes each criterion finding from any final-merits review, and cites the physical PDF pages. Narrow architecture comparison for expert letters, project/website impact, publication, and exhibit documentation; historic and fact-specific.
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
Judging the work of others research
Scholarly authorship research
Leading or critical role research
Medicine sector research
Teaching sector research
Other Named Professions sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.