AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision MAY252007_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision MAY252007_01B2203: Appeal dismissed. The record did not establish the claimed criteria or sustained acclaim/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: Printed decision identifies an EB-1A extraordinary-ability proceeding.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAY252007_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | May 25, 2007 |
Classification / field stated in source | AAO decision; EB-1A unless marked out of scope below. |
Procedural posture | Appeal from denial of EB-1A petition; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | This 2007 decision predates the modern express Kazarian final-merits sequence; it makes aggregate acclaim/top-of-field observations but no separate formal final-merits determination. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The record did not establish the claimed criteria or sustained acclaim/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 | Not met — p. 3 |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — p. 5 |
Scholarly authorship | Not met — p. 6 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not met — p. 6 |
Leading or critical role | |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — p. 7 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner’s claimed field was business; the record included employer materials, internal plans, presentations, and references to the beneficiary’s work at BNP Paribas.; pages: 2; 5; 6
claim: AAO found the record did not establish qualifying awards, published material primarily about the beneficiary, judging, original contributions of major significance, scholarly authorship, artistic display, leading/critical role, or high remuneration.; pages: 3; 4; 5; 6; 7
claim: The total record did not establish that the beneficiary had distinguished herself to the extent required for extraordinary ability; the appeal was dismissed.; pages: 7; 8
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible for individual case discussion
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
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
Entrepreneurship sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.