AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision OCT172017_01B2203: dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision OCT172017_01B2203: dismissed. Only two initial evidentiary criteria were met (display and leading/critical role); the petitioner did not meet a third. No formal final-merits determination followed.
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: Source is an AAO EB-1A extraordinary-ability appellate decision.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | OCT172017_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | Oct. 17, 2017 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A appellate decision, Matter of A-S- |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial; dismissed. |
Operative disposition | dismissed |
Final-merits status | Threshold failed at two criteria; the decision did not conduct the second-step final-merits determination. |
What the AAO decision addressed
Only two initial evidentiary criteria were met (display and leading/critical role); the petitioner did not meet a third. No formal final-merits determination followed.
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 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 | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | met — p. 6 |
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 AAO found the display-of-work and leading/critical-role criteria met, but no third criterion; it dismissed the appeal without reaching formal final merits.; pages: 2; 6
claim: The claimed awards were not sufficiently verified or shown nationally/internationally recognized for excellence; articles did not establish qualifying published material about the petitioner in major media.; pages: 3; 4; 5
claim: The record contained audition-related committee documents but did not establish actual judging of others’ work.; pages: 5
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.
PDF page 3 — Award claims assessed; awards not shown to satisfy criterion.
PDF page 5 — Published-material and judging evidence assessed; judging not established.
PDF page 6 — Concludes two criteria met, third not met; dismisses appeal; no formal final merits.
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
Leading or critical role research
Performance sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.