AAO research
EB-1A withdrawal and mootness — AAO decision MAR202023_01B2203: The appeal is dismissed as moot because the petitioner requested that the current petition…
Decision summary: AAO decision MAR202023_01B2203: The appeal is dismissed as moot because the petitioner requested that the current petition no longer form the basis for adjustment and instead sought transfer to the approved I-140. The decision states that further pursuit is moot and dismisses the appeal. It expressly notes the AAO lacks jurisdiction over transfer of I-140 petitions to different I-485 applications and over adjustment of status.
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_procedural_record; source classification is EB-1A/extraordinary ability, but this decision does not reach substantive criteria merits.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAR202023_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | March 20, 2023 |
Classification / field stated in source | Source identifies a Form I-140 petition for extraordinary ability under INA § 203(b)(1)(A) / EB-1A. For Matter of T-B- and the March 2023 decision, source visibly labels the decision Non-Precedent. |
Procedural posture | Appeal of a Texas Service Center denial of a Form I-140 for extraordinary ability; the petitioner is a martial arts professional. The Director concluded the record did not establish at least three of ten criteria. After the appeal was filed in January 2022, another extraordinary-ability I-140 was approved on April 22, 2022. The petitioner asked that the underlying basis be transferred from the pending petition to the approved petition for pending I-485 applications. |
Operative disposition | The appeal is dismissed as moot because the petitioner requested that the current petition no longer form the basis for adjustment and instead sought transfer to the approved I-140. |
Final-merits status | not reached |
What the AAO decision addressed
The decision states that further pursuit is moot and dismisses the appeal. It expressly notes the AAO lacks jurisdiction over transfer of I-140 petitions to different I-485 applications and over adjustment of status.
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 |
Membership | not reached |
Published material about the person | not reached |
Judging the work of others | not reached |
Original contributions of major significance | not reached |
Scholarly authorship | not reached |
Artistic display or showcases | not reached |
Leading or critical role | not reached |
High salary or remuneration | not reached |
Commercial success in the performing arts | not reached |
Source holds and limits
["The three-of-ten conclusion is the Director’s, not the AAO’s. AAO expressly disclaims jurisdiction over the requested transfer and adjustment; the decision does not find that the pending petition independently satisfied criteria.", "This short procedural decision has low standalone informational value for an individual indexable case page; it should not be presented as a substantive example of whether evidence satisfies EB-1A criteria."]
Specific caveats recorded by the reviewer
The three-of-ten conclusion is the Director’s, not the AAO’s. AAO expressly disclaims jurisdiction over the requested transfer and adjustment; the decision does not find that the pending petition independently satisfied criteria.
This short procedural decision has low standalone informational value for an individual indexable case page; it should not be presented as a substantive example of whether evidence satisfies EB-1A criteria.
Source-cited findings recorded in review
p. 1, Non-Precedent label, date, case identifier, martial arts classification and three-of-ten Director conclusion
p. 1, subsequent approval, basis-transfer request, mootness rationale, ORDER and footnotes
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: May be included in a carefully labeled source-cited procedural comparison of EB-1A appeal dispositions. Summary dismissals may be grouped only with their specific appeal-failure mechanism preserved. Mootness cases must remain a separate group, and the 2023 second-petition/basis-transfer case must remain distinct from completed-LPR-adjustment cases.
Editorial use note: Do not create an individual indexable page from this short procedural decision. Consider only as a cited example in a procedural explainer after review of the full comparison set.
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
Summary Dismissal research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.