Direct answer: EB-1A Evidence Combinations: Coverage of the person versus an employer, product, or event organizes source-reviewed AAO material around one research question and links readers to the underlying decision records.

This topic is a research lens across the source-reviewed corpus. Candidate keyword matches are discovery aids only; each linked record retains its own procedural stage and the exact issue decided. This page makes no claim that keyword matches are a validated cohort or a legal rule.

How the case examples were selected

The linked decisions are examples for topic discovery from the completed source-review matrix. They do not represent every matching record, prove a universal standard, or establish an approval probability. Open each source and compare the issue, evidence, date, and procedural stage.

Source-reviewed decision examples

• SEP272019_01B2203 — Appeal dismissed
  Potential swimmer/athlete comparison on awards, national-team membership, media coverage, and team role. Any aggregation needs more decisions and exact distinctions in level, event, and evidence. Official decision PDF.

• OCT212005_06B2203 — Appeal dismissed
  Useful actor comparison for date-of-filing evidence, coverage about individual versus production, festival appearance versus acclaim, and actual sales/pay evidence. Official decision PDF.

• AUG232024_02B2203 — Director decision withdrawn and matter Remanded.
  Potential comparison for entrepreneurs where independent press covers company work; preserve caveat that writing career was not established as the field. Eligible for source-grounded individual decision page only with explicit procedural posture, criterion-specific findings, final-merits status, and page citations; do not imply approval where AAO Remanded or confuse prior motion findings with current adjudication. Official decision PDF.

• APR052021_02B2203 — Dismissed
  Useful opera example on distinguishing judging and performances from major-media coverage; publication audience, content about the beneficiary, and timely submission matter. Official decision PDF.

• FEB162011_05B2203 — Director’s decision withdrawn; appeal sustained and petition approved.
  Strong favorable sports-media example. Accurate content should anchor acclaim in multiple independent signals (national coverage, judging, broadcast responsibility, books and audience), not traffic alone. eligible_for_editorial_review_with_citations

• JUN122017_01B2203 — dismissed
  Narrow performing-arts comparison on media coverage about an actor, role/credit evidence, artistic display, and commercial success. Official decision PDF.

• NOV022005_12B2203 — The appeal is dismissed.
  Procedural comparison only; no substantive merits. Official decision PDF.

• MAY122011_03B2203 — Director decision withdrawn; appeal sustained; petition approved.
  Affirmative actress example for coverage, display/performance, and remuneration; compare only with similarly situated artists and preserve 2011 context. Official decision PDF.

• FEB282013_02B2203 — Appeal rejected as untimely filed.
  Procedural comparison with 30/33-day deadline cases; do not present as merits review. Official decision PDF.

• DEC032024_02B2203 — Appeal dismissed (p. 6).
  High-value case comparing initial criterion qualification with the separate totality/final-merits step; specific evidence includes a credential-like competition title, startup investment, and post-departure media coverage. Label nonprecedent and date. Potential individual case page after legal/editorial review; explain that the AAO’s fact-specific final-merits conclusion followed three threshold criteria. No CMS edits or publication were made.

• JUN152007_01B2203 — Director decision withdrawn; appeal sustained; petition approved.
  Useful historical music example combining awards, press coverage, and roles in recognized ensembles. Clearly date the analysis and do not imply all musician profiles qualify. Official decision PDF.

• MAR222012_02B2203 — Appeal dismissed
  Useful film-festival/arts comparison on one documented, highly visible contribution versus the AAO’s legacy plural reading; single-organization leadership; actual salary records and robust peer samples; published coverage as a criterion distinct from acclaim. Official decision PDF.

• FEB272018_06B2203 — Appeal dismissed (p. 6).
  Useful endurance-sports example distinguishing athletic participation and praise from evidence of field-wide contributions, qualifying media, association criteria or critical role. Eligible for a narrow negative case summary; keep athletic category and exact failed criteria clear.

• MAY092006_02B2203 — dismissed
  Useful fashion-modeling comparison on contest awards, translated media coverage, judging, advisory-board membership, and role evidence. Official decision PDF.

• FEB202024_03B2203 — Director decision withdrawn; Remanded for final-merits determination.
  Narrow comparator for major-media coverage of a musician’s work in Bangladesh, including circulation evidence and translated media materials. Official decision PDF.

• FEB262021_04B2203 — Appeal dismissed.
  Strong final-merits example for temporal continuity and geographic relevance of acclaim; facts are singer- and record-specific. Official decision PDF.

• SEP072005_20B2203 — Appeal dismissed.
  Narrow visual-art example on award provenance, published coverage, contribution evidence, and exhibitions. Avoid suggesting mere museum employment or work presence proves qualifying display. Official decision PDF.

• FEB022018_01B2203 — Appeal dismissed
  Agricultural data science, peer review, scholarly authorship, venture funding, company role, and salary comparison. Useful as a narrow example of three threshold criteria followed by an unsuccessful final-merits determination; not a general rule about data-science roles. Official decision PDF.

AAO decisions are individual, nonprecedent records. Distinguish the Director’s findings, petitioner assertions, the AAO’s holding, remand directions, and any issue not reached. Historical decisions may apply an earlier legal framework; this research is not current filing advice.

Current framework and corrections

For the current regulatory framework, consult the USCIS Policy Manual. Read the source and corrections methodology before relying on an extracted summary.

Open the full AAO decision archive.