AAO research
EB-1A motions to reopen — AAO decision NOV042015_01B2203: Motion to reopen and motion to reconsider dismissed; prior denial affirmed (pp. 2, 8). Review…
Decision summary: AAO decision NOV042015_01B2203: Motion to reopen and motion to reconsider dismissed; prior denial affirmed (pp. 2, 8). Final merits found earlier impressive dance career but no activity for nearly a decade before filing, so acclaim was not sustained. The petitioner also failed to show intent to continue work in the same area of expertise or prospective U.S. benefit. (pp. 3–8).
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_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | NOV042015_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | November 4, 2015 |
Classification / field stated in source | Dancer; decision caption describes requested ability in athletics, while discussion concerns dance/performance. |
Procedural posture | Appeal after director denial and motion reaffirming denial; dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Motion to reopen and motion to reconsider dismissed; prior denial affirmed (pp. 2, 8). |
Final-merits status | Reached; adverse, based particularly on long gap in activity and dated support evidence. (pp. 3–5) |
What the AAO decision addressed
Final merits found earlier impressive dance career but no activity for nearly a decade before filing, so acclaim was not sustained. The petitioner also failed to show intent to continue work in the same area of expertise or prospective U.S. benefit. (pp. 3–8)
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 coded — source PDF |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not coded — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not coded — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not coded — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not coded — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not coded — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
(p. 1)
(p. 2)
(p. 3)
(p. 4)
(p. 5)
(p. 6)
(p. 7)
(p. 8)
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Useful performing-arts comparator on sustained-acclaim time gaps, dated recommendation letters, and separate intent-to-continue-work requirement. Caution: caption labels athletics while substantive discussion is dance. Individual case page with classification/caption nuance and separate statutory requirements.
Editorial use note: Individual case page with classification/caption nuance and separate statutory requirements.
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
Athletics sector research
Performance sector research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.