AAO research
AAO EB-1A decision Dec032007_02B2203: artist and failure to meet the three-criterion threshold
EB-1A petitions must provide evidence that directly satisfies each regulatory criterion; generic awards, routine teaching duties, or local publications do not meet the high threshold for sustained national or international acclaim. evidence of significant venues or major exhibitions for artistic dis
Decision Snapshot
Field Value --- --- Decision ID Dec032007_02B2203 Decision date not stated in the extraction Outcome dismissed Field or occupation artist Final merits discussed No / not stated
Criteria Discussed
artistic_display
awards
high_salary
judging
leading_critical_role
published_material
scholarly_articles
Criteria Accepted
Not stated in the extracted decision plan.
Criteria Rejected
artistic_display
awards
high_salary
judging
leading_critical_role
published_material
scholarly_articles
Core Lesson
EB-1A petitions must provide evidence that directly satisfies each regulatory criterion; generic awards, routine teaching duties, or local publications do not meet the high threshold for sustained national or international acclaim.
Evidence Issue
evidence of significant venues or major exhibitions for artistic display
nationally or internationally recognized awards rather than student or institutional honors
comparative data showing petitioner’s salary is high relative to others in the field
proof that petitioner performed a judging function beyond routine teaching
demonstration of responsibility for an organization’s success or standing
published material that is primarily about petitioner and appears in major trade or media outlets, with required English translation
scholarly publications that clearly indicate national or international 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.