AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision SEP062006_02B2203: dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision SEP062006_02B2203: dismissed. No evidence established sustained acclaim or plan to continue work in the U.S.; appeal dismissed.
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: EB-1A AAO appellate or motion decision; reviewed for source-grounded findings and procedural posture.. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | SEP062006_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | September 6, 2006 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A AAO decision |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Vermont Service Center denial; dismissed. |
Operative disposition | dismissed |
Final-merits status | Legacy overall acclaim finding adverse; no modern formal Kazarian final-merits determination. |
What the AAO decision addressed
No evidence established sustained acclaim or plan to continue work in the U.S.; appeal dismissed.
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 coded — source PDF |
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 | |
High salary or remuneration | |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
claim: Vocational certificates were not nationally/internationally recognized awards; asserted honors lacked independent documentation.; pages: 3; 4
claim: Employment did not establish selective association membership; local newspaper coverage did not establish major media.; pages: 4; 5
claim: Employment at UYTAS did not establish distinguished reputation/critical role; earnings lacked field-relative comparison.; pages: 5
claim: No evidence established sustained acclaim or plan to continue work in the U.S.; appeal dismissed.; pages: 6
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: eligible_for_aggregation: True; eligible_for_individual_decision_page: True; reason: Legacy skilled-trade case for vocational certifications vs awards, employer vs association membership, and personal salary comparison.; recommended_use: Source-cited individual page; aggregate only with procedural and date caveats preserved.
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
Leading or critical role research
High salary or remuneration research
Computing sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.