AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision MAY272022_01B2203: dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision MAY272022_01B2203: dismissed. The four-criterion threshold finding did not resolve final merits; the AAO found sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing unproven.
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: Complete AAO decision addressing a Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAY272022_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2022-05-27 |
Classification / field stated in source | AAO EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition decision |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Texas Service Center denial of a Form I-140 EB-1A petition; appeal dismissed after final-merits review. |
Operative disposition | dismissed |
Final-merits status | The AAO conducted and resolved a final-merits determination against the petitioner. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The four-criterion threshold finding did not resolve final merits; the AAO found sustained acclaim/top-of-field standing unproven.
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. 4 |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — p. 5 |
Scholarly authorship | |
Artistic display or showcases | |
Leading or critical role | Not considered — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not considered — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner is an artist specializing in miniature paintings; the Director found four criteria met, but the AAO concluded the total record did not establish acclaim/top-of-field standing. (pp. 1–3); pages: 1; 2; 3
claim: The AAO considered award, authorship, original-contribution, artistic-display, and related evidence, including craft shows, fairs, and exhibitions; it found the record did not demonstrate broad recognition, influence, or sustained acclaim. (pp. 3–5); pages: 3; 4; 5
claim: The AAO found the petitioner had not shown sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the top of the field. (p. 6); pages: 6
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
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
Commercial success in the performing arts research
Threshold research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.