AAO research
EB-1A withdrawal and mootness — AAO decision OCT282005_02B2203: Director’s decision withdrawn; appeal sustained and petition approved. Review source…
Decision summary: AAO decision OCT282005_02B2203: Director’s decision withdrawn; appeal sustained and petition approved. 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 | OCT282005_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2005-10-28 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial of EB-1A petition; older AAO decision.; citation_pages: 2; 3; 4; 5; classification: Appeal of Nebraska Service Center denial of EB-1A petition; older AAO decision.; director_findings: As described in the reviewed decision; no unreported earlier findings are inferred. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Director’s decision withdrawn; appeal sustained and petition approved.', 'basis': 'AAO finds the petitioner met at least three criteria and concludes the record supports sustained acclaim. It credits scholarly authorship, original contributions/curatorial impact, and work displayed in recognized museum settings, based on the cited record.', 'citation_pages': [5, 2, 3, 4, 5]} |
Final-merits status | AAO finds sustained acclaim and extraordinary ability from the total record and sustains the appeal. |
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 | Not considered — source PDF |
Membership | Not considered — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not considered — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | Not considered — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | met — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not considered — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | Not considered — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
true
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: {'eligible_for_narrow_comparison': False, 'fit': 'Potentially useful only as historical museum-curator context after legal review.', 'caveats': 'Older nonprecedent framework; do not present as current rule.'}
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
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.