AAO research
EB-1A leading or critical role — AAO decision MAY132021_01B2203: Remanded. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Remanded AAO Remanded because the decision did not adequately analyze published material, judging, contributions, and authorship; leading/critical role had been found met by the Director.
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_AAO_decision. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAY132021_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | May 13, 2021 |
Classification / field stated in source | Remanded for new decision |
Procedural posture | Appeal from denial; AAO found the Director’s analysis incomplete across claimed criteria and Remanded for a reasoned decision. |
Operative disposition | Remanded |
Final-merits status | Not reached; Remanded for a new criterion analysis. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO Remanded because the decision did not adequately analyze published material, judging, contributions, and authorship; leading/critical role had been found met by the Director.
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 — source PDF |
Membership | Not reached — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not reached |
Judging the work of others | Not reached — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not reached — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | met |
High salary or remuneration | Not reached — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not reached — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: Cover identifies petitioner and appellate posture.; pages: 1
claim: AAO notes role finding and identifies omissions/inadequate analysis, including authorship and published material.; pages: 2
claim: AAO discusses judging/contributions and requires a reasoned new determination.; pages: 3
claim: AAO remands; it does not decide final merits.; pages: 4
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: eligible_for_narrow_fact_grounded_content: True; must_preserve_procedural_posture: True; recommended_use: Useful procedural/medical-research example about explicit, reasoned treatment of each claimed criterion and carrying forward an RFE finding into the final 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
Leading or critical role research
Medicine sector research
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.