AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision NOV212005_09B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed The decision found the criteria unmet and dismissed; aggregate discussion does not amount to a distinct formal final-merits determination.
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: The source identifies an EB-1A Form I-140 petition under INA §203(b)(1)(A).. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | NOV212005_09B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2005-11-21 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability under INA §203(b)(1)(A) |
Procedural posture | AAO appeal of Vermont Service Center EB-1A denial; appeal dismissed. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed |
Final-merits status | The decision found the criteria unmet and dismissed; aggregate discussion does not amount to a distinct formal final-merits determination. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The decision found the criteria unmet and dismissed; aggregate discussion does not amount to a distinct formal final-merits determination.
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 met — p. 4 |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | Not met — p. 5 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not considered — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | |
Leading or critical role | Not considered — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: The petitioner was a painter who submitted awards, exhibition materials and press items from Nepal and other locations.; pages: 2; 3
claim: Awards were not shown to establish sustained national or international acclaim; membership evidence did not establish outstanding-achievement admission.; pages: 3; 4
claim: Published articles and judging evidence did not satisfy the criteria.; pages: 4; 5
claim: Letters and exhibition evidence did not establish original contributions of major significance or qualifying display consistent with acclaim.; pages: 5; 6; 7; 8
claim: High-salary criterion was not met; appeal 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
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
Final Merits research
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.