AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision NOV142019_03B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed Only artistic display was accepted; claimed awards, published material, judging, and leading/critical role were not established; fewer than three criteria.
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: Decision identifies Form I-140 extraordinary ability and discusses artistic display under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(h)(3). (pp. 1–2, 6). This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | NOV142019_03B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | November 14, 2019 |
Classification / field stated in source | Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability appeal decision. |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | The initial three-criterion threshold was not met. |
What the AAO decision addressed
Only artistic display was accepted; claimed awards, published material, judging, and leading/critical role were not established; fewer than three criteria.
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 | Not met — p. 5 |
Original contributions of major significance | Not coded — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not coded — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | |
Leading or critical role | |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The Director had accepted artistic display, and the AAO agreed based on film screenings at competitions/festivals.; pages: 2; 6
claim: Awards evidence consisted of finalist placements/local awards not sufficiently substantiated as qualifying nationally or internationally recognized awards.; pages: 3
claim: Published material failed to establish qualifying major-media status/aboutness; some articles postdated filing.; pages: 4; 5
claim: Judging claim was not established on the submitted record.; pages: 5
claim: Leading/critical role evidence did not show that the petitioner’s editor role was critical to a distinguished organization.; pages: 6; 7
claim: Fewer than three criteria were met; no formal final merits was reached and 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
Artistic display or showcases research
Leading or critical role research
Medicine sector research
Performance sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.