Direct answer: EB-1A Evidence Combinations: Conclusive claims, specific error, and procedural dismissal 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

• JUN242005_07B2203 — The appeal is summarily dismissed under 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v).
  Procedural comparison with appeals dismissed after a promised brief/evidence was not filed, distinct from cases where a brief was filed but substantively inadequate. Official decision PDF.

• NOV162005_28B2203 — The appeal is summarily dismissed under 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v).
  Procedural comparison with short EB-1A appeal summary-dismissal decisions for failure to identify a specific legal/factual error or provide promised supporting materials; preserve each record’s actual mechanism. Official decision PDF.

• JAN222018_02B2203 — The AAO summarily dismisses under 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v).
  summary dismissal for inadequate appeal specification Official decision PDF.

• OCT112005_24B2203 — rejection of untimely appeal
  medium Official decision PDF.

• JUN152020_01B2203 — summary dismissal; AAO agrees with general eligibility denial but no individual criterion findings stated
  medium Official decision PDF.

• SEP022009_10B2203 — Appeal summarily dismissed.
  Narrow procedural example of why broad appeal assertions without supporting evidence/specific error are insufficient. Official decision PDF.

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

• NOV032012_11B2203 — Appeal summarily dismissed.
  Strong narrow legal explainer candidate about when comparable evidence is available. Must not imply that the criteria do not fit this occupation or that listed evidence satisfied any criterion. Official decision PDF.

• APR202012_07B2203 — Appeal summarily dismissed.
  Procedural comparator for a self-represented/simple appeal that identifies no specific error. Not an adjudication of high-salary eligibility. 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.

• OCT202011_02B2203 — Appeal dismissed.
  A narrow appeal-briefing example; director’s criterion findings are recited, while AAO did not newly adjudicate all criteria. Official decision PDF.

• SEP042015_01B2203 — The AAO summarily dismisses under 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(1)(v).
  summary dismissal for inadequate appeal specification / promised filing absent Official decision PDF.

• DEC062010_01B2203 — Appeal summarily dismissed.
  Procedural comparator for generic appeal assertions touching awards, published articles and judging without a specific identified error. Official decision PDF.

• SEP112012_11B2203 — Appeal dismissed.
  Possible narrow explainer on appeal specificity; list alleged categories as petitioner assertions only, never as criteria found met. Official decision PDF.

• NOV022005_27B2203 — Appeal summarily dismissed.
  fit: procedural summary dismissal; nonspecific appeal; reason: Narrow procedural illustration only; similar boilerplate appeal facts may be aggregated only as a procedural pattern, not as common merits evidence. Official decision PDF.

• MAR202023_01B2203 — The appeal is dismissed as moot because the petitioner requested that the current petition no longer form the basis for adjustment and instead sought transfer to the approved I-140.
  Keep as a distinct mootness example involving approval of a second EB-1A petition and a requested change in basis; it is not equivalent to the cases dismissed after completed LPR adjustment. Official decision PDF.

• SEP302005_02B2203 — Appeal summarily dismissed.
  fit: procedural summary dismissal for no identified error and absent promised brief; reason: Narrow procedural illustration only; no criterion-level assessment. Official decision PDF.

• DEC162005_24B2203 — Appeal summarily dismissed.
  fit: procedural summary dismissal for absent promised brief; reason: Procedural illustration only, particularly failure to follow through on a promised brief; no merits treatment. 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.