AAO research
EB-1A published material about the person — AAO decision SEP222022_02B2203: Director’s decision withdrawn; matter remanded for a new decision. Review…
Decision summary: The AAO director’s decision withdrawn; matter Remanded for a new decision. AAO found the Director failed to adequately explain findings on published material and original contributions and did not meaningfully address record evidence. It directed reevaluation of the evidence and a totality/final-merits analysis if the threshold is met.
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; verified in source review. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | SEP222022_02B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | September 22, 2022 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A extraordinary ability; field: global manufacture/marketing of home appliances and business strategy. |
Procedural posture | Appeal from Nebraska Service Center denial; Director accepted leading role and high salary but found fewer than three criteria. |
Operative disposition | Director’s decision withdrawn; matter Remanded for a new decision. |
Final-merits status | “not reached by AAO; Director’s decision withdrawn and matter Remanded.” |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO found the Director failed to adequately explain findings on published material and original contributions and did not meaningfully address record evidence. It directed reevaluation of the evidence and a totality/final-merits analysis if the threshold is met.
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 coded — source PDF |
Membership | Not coded — source PDF |
Published material about the person | unclear |
Judging the work of others | Not coded — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | unclear |
Scholarly authorship | abandoned |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | met |
High salary or remuneration | met |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
pp. 1–4; role/pay and criteria p. 2, deficiencies p. 3, remand/final-merits instructions p. 4.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Procedural comparator for adequately addressing business evidence and written criterion reasoning; do not state an outcome on the Remanded criteria. eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations
Editorial use note: eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations
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
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
Entrepreneurship sector research
Threshold research
Remand research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.