AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision NOV142019_05B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed The AAO found judging and high salary met but rejected awards, published material, and leading-role claims; only two 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: Complete printed AAO Form I-140 EB-1A source; identity and posture confirmed on opening page(s).. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | NOV142019_05B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | November 14, 2019 |
Classification / field stated in source | Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition under INA §203(b)(1)(A). |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Texas Service Center denial; nonprecedent AAO decision; dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | The AAO found only two criteria met and expressly did not provide a formal final-merits determination. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The AAO found judging and high salary met but rejected awards, published material, and leading-role claims; only two 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 | |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | met — p. 6 |
Original contributions of major significance | Not considered — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not considered — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not considered — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | |
High salary or remuneration | met — p. 8 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner was an advertising agency seeking classification for its creative-director beneficiary; the Director found only judging met.; pages: 1; 2
claim: The AAO found awards and published-material evidence insufficient, retained judging as met, rejected the leading/critical-role claim, and found the high-salary claim met.; pages: 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8
claim: Because fewer than three criteria were established, the AAO did not reach final merits and dismissed the appeal.; pages: 8; 9
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible with caveats
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
Final Merits research
Waiv research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.