AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision MAY232011_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed The AAO states the three-category threshold is unmet but expressly conducts an aggregate final-merits determination, finding the record insufficient to show sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing.
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: Physical source is an AAO/SCOPS decision concerning EB-1A classification and appeal or related merits review.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAY232011_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | May 23, 2011 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability Form I-140 |
Procedural posture | Nonprecedent AAO appeal from denial of an EB-1A Form I-140; appeal dismissed after explicit final-merits determination. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | Pages 14–15 explicitly conduct final merits and find the aggregate record does not distinguish the petitioner among the small percentage at the top; appeal dismissed. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO states the three-category threshold is unmet but expressly conducts an aggregate final-merits determination, finding the record insufficient to show sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing.
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 | |
Membership | Not met — p. 7 |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | Not considered — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not met — p. 12 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | |
High salary or remuneration | |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner held a university dean role and submitted evidence concerning academic administration, curriculum and education programs.; evidence_pages: 1; 2; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13
claim: AAO reviews the evidence and finds the required three initial criterion categories are not established.; evidence_pages: 14
claim: Despite threshold failure, page 14 expressly begins final merits; aggregate evidence does not show sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing.; evidence_pages: 14; 15
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible with caveats
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
Teaching sector research
Threshold research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.