AAO research
EB-1A leading or critical role — AAO decision OCT042005_06B2203: Dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision OCT042005_06B2203: Dismissed. AAO found the submitted awards were not shown to be nationally/internationally recognized and the record did not establish qualifying role, performance evidence, or sustained acclaim.
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_AAO_decision. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | OCT042005_06B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | October 4, 2005 |
Classification / field stated in source | Appeal dismissed |
Procedural posture | Appeal from denial; claims included awards, leading/critical role, artistic performance/display, and acclaim. |
Operative disposition | Dismissed |
Final-merits status | Unfavorable; the record did not distinguish the petitioner from others at the top of the field or establish sustained acclaim. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found the submitted awards were not shown to be nationally/internationally recognized and the record did not establish qualifying role, performance evidence, or sustained acclaim.
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 — source PDF |
Membership | Not reached — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not reached |
Judging the work of others | Not reached — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not reached — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Not reached — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not met |
High salary or remuneration | Not reached — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not reached — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: Cover dates the decision October 4, 2005 and identifies the petition.; pages: 1
claim: AAO states the extraordinary-ability standard and begins analysis.; pages: 2
claim: AAO reviews award evidence and finds it insufficient to show required recognition; discusses role.; pages: 3
claim: AAO finds performance/role evidence insufficient and lack of sustained acclaim.; pages: 4
claim: AAO dismisses the appeal.; pages: 5
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: eligible_for_narrow_fact_grounded_content: True; must_preserve_procedural_posture: True; recommended_use: Historical opera/performance example on award recognition, translation, and role evidence; do not treat an employer’s reputation as proof of an individual’s leading role.
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
Published material about the person research
Leading or critical role research
Performance sector research
Translat research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.