AAO research
EB-1A published material about the person — AAO decision MAY302018_04B2203: dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision MAY302018_04B2203: dismissed. The AAO retained judging but found published-material and scholarly-authorship criteria were not established. Although the decision separately conducted final-merits review, it found the record did not establish 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: Complete AAO decision involving an EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition or motion.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | MAY302018_04B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2018-05-30 |
Classification / field stated in source | AAO EB-1A appellate decision or motion proceeding |
Procedural posture | Appeal of denial of a Form I-140 EB-1A petition; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | dismissed |
Final-merits status | The AAO expressly evaluated the record under final merits. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO retained judging but found published-material and scholarly-authorship criteria were not established. Although the decision separately conducted final-merits review, it found the record did not establish 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 considered — source PDF |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | met — p. 2 |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — p. 2 |
Scholarly authorship | |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not met — p. 2 |
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 AAO found the petitioner’s deputy-editor service satisfied judging, but screenshots did not establish qualifying published material about him and the writings were not shown to be scholarly articles. (pp. 2–3, 5); pages: 2; 3; 5
claim: The petitioner did not establish at least three criteria; the AAO nevertheless included a separately titled final-merits determination and found sustained acclaim / top-of-field recognition insufficient. (pp. 3, 6); pages: 3; 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
Performance sector research
Coverage research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.