AAO research

AAO EB-1A decision AUG222024_02B2203

Meeting only one EB‑1A evidentiary criterion is insufficient; petitioners must satisfy at least three criteria and must address every denied criterion on appeal, linking all evidence directly to sustained national or international acclaim. Evidence of a distinguished reputation for the leading criti

Decision Snapshot

Field Value --- --- Decision ID AUG222024_02B2203 Decision date not stated Outcome dismissed Field or occupation Not stated in the extracted decision plan. Final merits discussed Yes

Criteria Discussed

  • judging

  • leading_critical_role

  • membership

  • original_contributions

  • published_material

  • scholarly_articles

Criteria Accepted

  • judging

Criteria Rejected

  • leading_critical_role

  • published_material

  • scholarly_articles

Core Lesson

Meeting only one EB‑1A evidentiary criterion is insufficient; petitioners must satisfy at least three criteria and must address every denied criterion on appeal, linking all evidence directly to sustained national or international acclaim.

Evidence Issue

  • Evidence of a distinguished reputation for the leading critical role.

  • Demonstration that published work has sustained national or international impact.

  • Sufficient quantity and impact of scholarly articles tied to acclaim.

  • Clear articulation of how professional memberships reflect sustained acclaim.

How This Connects

This decision is part of Extraordinary's AAO EB-1A corpus. It is exposed as a structured decision card so readers, search engines, and AI search systems can connect the decision to broader EB-1A evidence patterns.

Source Note

Non-precedent AAO decisions are used as evidence examples. They are not binding authority and do not predict any individual case.