AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision OCT292009_04B2203: Appeal dismissed; prior denial affirmed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: The AAO Appeal dismissed; prior denial affirmed AAO reaffirmed prior findings: awards, memberships, published material, judging, contributions, authorship, display, role, and salary not established. The filing did not establish three criteria.
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: Opening page identifies EB-1A classification and final page confirms disposition.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | OCT292009_04B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | October 29, 2009 |
Classification / field stated in source | Form I-140 EB-1A extraordinary-ability petition under INA §203(b)(1)(A). |
Procedural posture | Motion to reopen/reconsider prior AAO denial; motion granted, prior denial affirmed, petition denied. |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed; prior denial affirmed |
Final-merits status | AAO found the initial threshold unmet and the record insufficient for sustained acclaim; no distinct final-merits stage. |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO reaffirmed prior findings: awards, memberships, published material, judging, contributions, authorship, display, role, and salary not established. The filing did not establish three criteria.
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 | |
Published material about the person | |
Judging the work of others | Not met — p. 9 |
Original contributions of major significance | |
Scholarly authorship | Not met — p. 10 |
Artistic display or showcases | Not met — p. 11 |
Leading or critical role | Not met — p. 11 |
High salary or remuneration | Not met — p. 11 |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not considered — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: This is a motion decision revisiting earlier AAO findings; motion granted but prior denial affirmed and petition denied.; pages: 2; 12
claim: AAO found 1986 award evidence too old to show acclaim at the 2002 filing; membership, press, judging, contributions, authorship, display, role, and salary evidence also failed.; pages: 3; 11
claim: Appeal/underlying petition remained denied.; pages: 12
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Eligible with caveats
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
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.