AAO research
EB-1A published material about the person — AAO decision MAY082015_01B2203: Motion to reconsider dismissed; prior decisions affirmed and petition remains…
Decision summary: AAO decision MAY082015_01B2203: Motion to reconsider dismissed; prior decisions affirmed and petition remains denied (p. 5). The motion did not establish legal or factual error in the prior decision. Evidence about gallery opening and reference letters did not show that petitioner’s artwork influenced the field or constituted original contributions of major significance; no new specific, corroborating evidence was provided. Threshold evidence remained insufficient (pp. 3-5).
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; verified in source review. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAY082015_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | May 8, 2015 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability in visual arts; petitioner is an artist claiming original artistic contributions and influence (pp. 3-4). |
Procedural posture | Motion to reconsider AAO’s December 15, 2014 appellate decision; agency also previously granted and resolved an earlier motion (pp. 2-3). |
Operative disposition | Motion to reconsider dismissed; prior decisions affirmed and petition remains denied (p. 5). |
Final-merits status | Not coded in the normalized review fields |
What the AAO decision addressed
The motion did not establish legal or factual error in the prior decision. Evidence about gallery opening and reference letters did not show that petitioner’s artwork influenced the field or constituted original contributions of major significance; no new specific, corroborating evidence was provided. Threshold evidence remained insufficient (pp. 3-5).
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 coded — source PDF |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | not met |
Judging the work of others | Not coded — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | not met |
Scholarly authorship | Not coded — 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 holds and limits
"Source redacts names/gallery; maintain anonymized phrasing and preserve procedural context."
Source-cited findings recorded in review
p1: Motion-decision cover and instructions.; p2: Motion-to-reconsider legal standard, distinct from reopening.; p3: Claims about gallery and article; media not shown to qualify, and claims about artistic influence unsupported.; p4: Reference letter generalized and uncorroborated; no specific artwork impact established.; p5: Motion fails legal/factual error standard; threshold criteria remain unmet; petition denied.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Useful narrow artist example: gallery access, praise, or an opening alone does not show that specific work influenced the field; the decision emphasizes concrete examples and corroboration. Eligible as an explicitly motion-stage example of evidentiary insufficiency; avoid implying a new full appeal decision.
Editorial use note: Eligible as an explicitly motion-stage example of evidentiary insufficiency; avoid implying a new full appeal decision.
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
Published material about the person research
Original contributions of major significance research
Performance sector research
Threshold research
Corroborat research
Major Significance research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.