AAO research
EB-1A remand — AAO decision OCT112005_08B2203: Matter remanded for new RFE and decision. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO {‘outcome’: ‘Matter Remanded for new RFE and decision.’, ‘basis’: ‘The decision explains deficiencies in the Director’s request for evidence and instructs that a new, specific RFE be issued; it does not make a final eligibility determination.’, ‘citation_pages’: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]} The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
Source limitation: The review record contains a source hold or limitation. Read the limitation below before relying on any case detail; unresolved facts are not treated as findings.
Scope classification from review: in_scope_procedural_eb1a_decision. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | OCT112005_08B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | Not stated in normalized review fields |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: AAO appeal of denial; Remanded for issuance of a new RFE and new decision; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; classification: AAO appeal of denial; Remanded for issuance of a new RFE and new decision; director_findings: See decision-specific basis; AAO findings distinguished from Director findings. |
Operative disposition | {‘outcome’: ‘Matter Remanded for new RFE and decision.’, ‘basis’: ‘The decision explains deficiencies in the Director’s request for evidence and instructs that a new, specific RFE be issued; it does not make a final eligibility determination.’, ‘citation_pages’: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]} |
Final-merits status | No final merits determination; remand for evidence development. |
What the AAO decision addressed
The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
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 | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Membership | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Unclear; reserved — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
true
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: {'eligible_for_narrow_comparison': False, 'fit': 'Procedural case, not a substantive approval/denial comparison; old redactions obscure beneficiary and details.', 'caveats': 'Nonprecedent, fact-specific decision; remands and procedural motions are not approvals. Exclude motion decisions from substantive merits aggregation. Older decisions require legal-temporal context.'}
Page-level source trail
Use the official PDF and the cited physical page numbers to check each statement.
Open the official USCIS decision PDF. Page-specific citations were not available in the normalized row.
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
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.