AAO research
EB-1A judging the work of others — AAO decision SEP232020_01B2203: Motion to reconsider dismissed. Review source status, procedural posture and the…
Decision summary: AAO decision SEP232020_01B2203: Motion to reconsider dismissed. AAO concludes the petitioner has not shown the prior decision incorrectly applied law or policy; newly offered evidence does not establish an error cognizable on reconsideration.
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 | SEP232020_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | September 23, 2020 |
Classification / field stated in source | EB-1A; television/development director |
Procedural posture | Motion to reconsider following dismissal of appeal; the decision reviews claimed legal/policy error in prior findings. |
Operative disposition | Motion to reconsider dismissed. |
Final-merits status | "unclear" |
What the AAO decision addressed
AAO concludes the petitioner has not shown the prior decision incorrectly applied law or policy; newly offered evidence does not establish an error cognizable on reconsideration.
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 | Not coded — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met |
Original contributions of major significance | Not coded — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | met |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | met |
High salary or remuneration | Not coded — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not coded — source PDF |
Source-cited findings recorded in review
pp. 1–4; relevant findings cited in criterion entries and page notes.
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: Procedural example for reconsideration limits and the distinction between disagreement with evidentiary weight and legal error. Do not portray as a fresh adjudication of initial evidence. 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.
PDF page 1 — Cover: development director and motion posture; prior appeal dismissal.
PDF page 2 — Motion standard; prior criteria and adverse final-merits findings.
PDF page 3 — New arguments/evidence and prior analysis addressed.
PDF page 4 — Concludes no legal/policy error; motion denied.
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
Judging the work of others research
Scholarly authorship research
Leading or critical role research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.