AAO research
EB-1A three-criterion threshold — AAO decision SEP302024_01B2203: Appeal dismissed; petition denied. Review source status, procedural posture and the…
Decision summary: AAO decision SEP302024_01B2203: Appeal dismissed; petition denied. The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
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_procedural_eb1a_decision. This is a source-review label, not a legal conclusion.
Decision snapshot
Decision ID | SEP302024_01B2203 |
|---|---|
Decision date as printed | 2024-09-30 |
Classification / field stated in source | Classification not stated in the normalized review fields |
Procedural posture | AAO_posture: De novo appeal from denial. Director found judging, scholarly authorship, and high salary criteria met; AAO agreed threshold was satisfied and independently found final merits unmet.; citation_pages: 1; 2; 3; classification: AAO appeal/motion as described in source; director_findings: De novo appeal from denial. Director found judging, scholarly authorship, and high salary criteria met; AAO agreed threshold was satisfied and independently found final merits unmet. |
Operative disposition | {'outcome': 'Appeal dismissed; petition denied.', 'basis': 'Evidence did not establish sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing: research citations were substantially self-citations/coauthor network, few independent citations, limited media recognition, and no documented sustained acclaim. (pp. 2–3)', 'citation_pages': [1, 2, 3]} |
Final-merits status | AAO weighed the totality and found insufficient sustained acclaim or top-of-field recognition. (pp. 2–3) |
What the AAO decision addressed
The review record does not provide a normalized explanation of the disposition. Consult the cited source pages.
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 reached — source PDF |
Membership | Not reached — source PDF |
Published material about the person | Not reached — source PDF |
Judging the work of others | met — source PDF |
Original contributions of major significance | Not met — source PDF |
Scholarly authorship | met — source PDF |
Artistic display or showcases | Not coded — source PDF |
Leading or critical role | Not reached — source PDF |
High salary or remuneration | met — source PDF |
Commercial success in the performing arts | Not reached — source PDF |
How this record may be used in research
Comparison scope: {'eligible_for_narrow_comparison': True, 'fit': 'Useful narrow final-merits discussion in academic dentistry: self-citation, coauthor citation networks, independent recognition, and sustained acclaim.', 'caveats': 'Nonprecedent, fact-specific decision. Preserve posture and individual evidence; do not aggregate as a generalized rule.'}
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
Threshold research
Final Merits research
Browse the AAO decision index · Read EB-1A evidence guides · Review source and correction methodology.