AAO research
EB-1A awards — AAO decision SEP212009_05B2203: AAO concluded the record did not establish three criteria or sustained acclaim/top-field standing. It…
Decision summary: AAO decision SEP212009_05B2203: AAO concluded the record did not establish three criteria or sustained acclaim/top-field standing. It credited scholarly authorship criterion but found contributions, role, salary and awards insufficient on this record (pp. 14-20).
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: in_scope_EB1A_source_reviewed. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | SEP212009_05B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | September 21, 2009 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A appeal in the arts for a journalist/editor and digital-media innovator; record discusses magazine journalism, digital/video journalism, articles, awards, salary, and commercial-success claims (pp. 2-3, 11-17). |
Procedural posture | Nebraska Service Center denial appealed; AAO dismissed (pp. 2, 20). |
Operative disposition | AAO concluded the record did not establish three criteria or sustained acclaim/top-field standing. It credited scholarly authorship criterion but found contributions, role, salary and awards insufficient on this record (pp. 14-20). |
Final-merits status | Final merits/aggregate discussion is adverse despite one criterion met; appeal dismissed (pp. 19-20). |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO concluded the record did not establish three criteria or sustained acclaim/top-field standing. It credited scholarly authorship criterion but found contributions, role, salary and awards insufficient on this record (pp. 14-20).
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 coded — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | not met |
Scholarly authorship | met |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | not met |
High salary or remuneration | not met |
Commercial success in the performing arts | not met |
Source holds and limits
No source identity, completeness, or integrity hold. Public copy redacts claimant identities; no identifying inference should be added.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Useful case-specific example but it is nonprecedent; distinguish the individual contribution from the employer/platform’s publicity or awards.
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
Original contributions of major significance research
Scholarly authorship research
Leading or critical role research
High salary or remuneration research
Commercial success in the performing arts research
Performance sector research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.