AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision SEP112013_02B2203: Appeal dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the official USCIS PDF.
Decision summary: AAO decision SEP112013_02B2203: Appeal dismissed. AAO found petitioner had not established three types of qualifying evidence; the decision also notes he abandoned one claim on appeal. (pp. 4–10).
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_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | SEP112013_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | September 11, 2013 |
Classification / field stated in source | Petitioner with prior athletic achievements seeking to work in the United States as a consultant/coach rather than solely as a competitor. |
Procedural posture | Appeal of Texas Service Center denial; priority date January 6, 2012. AAO addressed whether petitioner could rely on athlete achievements for proposed consulting/coaching work, then evaluated the claimed criteria. (pp. 2–4) |
Operative disposition | Appeal dismissed. |
Final-merits status | No formal final-merits determination. AAO expressly explains a final-merits step would follow only if three criteria were met, and finds the antecedent threshold unsatisfied. (pp. 9–10) |
What the AAO decision addressed
Appeal dismissed. AAO found petitioner had not established three types of qualifying evidence; the decision also notes he abandoned one claim on appeal. (pp. 4–10)
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 met |
Membership | not met |
Published material about the person | not met |
Judging the work of others | not met |
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 | abandoned |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source holds and limits
This 2013 non-precedent decision predates current USCIS policy and should not be used as controlling authority. (p. 1); One criterion claim was expressly abandoned; do not code it as substantively not met. The final-merits step was not performed. (pp. 9–10)
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Source-cited FAQ about defining the claimed field where an athlete proposes to continue as a coach or consultant, with separate criterion-level examples.
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
Awards research
Membership research
Published material about the person research
Judging the work of others research
Leading or critical role research
Athletics sector research
Entrepreneurship sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.