AAO research
EB-1A published material about the person — AAO decision MAY272020_08B2203: Director decision withdrawn; matter remanded for a new decision. Review source…
Decision summary: The AAO director decision withdrawn; matter Remanded for a new decision. AAO finds inadequate criterion-specific analysis of evidence for published material, original contributions, and high salary in the response to the RFE. AAO expressly does not find present record establishes eligibility.
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 | MAY272020_08B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | May 27, 2020 |
Classification / field stated in source | Director decision withdrawn; matter Remanded for a new decision. |
Procedural posture | Appeal from denial; AAO withdraws and remands because Director did not adequately analyze the RFE response and three claimed criteria. |
Operative disposition | Director decision withdrawn; matter Remanded for a new decision. |
Final-merits status | Not reached; Remanded for a new decision after criterion reassessment. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO finds inadequate criterion-specific analysis of evidence for published material, original contributions, and high salary in the response to the RFE. AAO expressly does not find present record establishes eligibility.
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 | unclear |
Judging the work of others | Not reached — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not reached — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not reached |
High salary or remuneration | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not reached — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: Cover: May 27, 2020; petitioner described as entrepreneur and marketing specialist.; pages: 1
claim: AAO says Director found two of five criteria and remands because decision omitted detailed analysis of three criteria and RFE response.; pages: 2
claim: AAO addresses published-material evidence including press articles and business coverage; analysis was incomplete.; pages: 3
claim: AAO directs renewed review of published material, original contributions, and high salary; withdraws/remands and does not grant petition.; 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: Reasoned criterion-analysis remand. Explain that the AAO ordered reassessment and did not find any disputed criterion met.
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
Entrepreneurship sector research
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.