Direct answer: EB-1A Evidence Combinations: Timeliness, successive motions, and procedural history 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

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

• OCT212013_01B2203 — Motion to reopen dismissed as untimely and procedurally deficient.
  Procedural comparator for an untimely motion to reopen a withdrawn-appeal dismissal. Official decision PDF.

• JUL022024_02B2203 — Motion to reopen dismissed; motion to reconsider dismissed.
  Procedural comparator for attempts to appeal an AAO dismissal and successive motions with deadline/receipt issues. Official decision PDF.

• OCT262016_01B2203 — Motion to reopen or reconsider denied as untimely.
  fit: procedural motion deadline decision; nonprecedent; reason: Eligible only for a narrow procedural explanation of the motion deadline and date calculation described in this case. Official decision PDF.

• APR122018_01B2203 — Motion to reopen denied; motion to reconsider denied.
  Procedural comparator for successive filings, attempted appeal of AAO’s own decision, and an untimely motion with no new facts. Official decision PDF.

• AUG192005_12B2203 — Appeal rejected as untimely.
  Procedural comparison for an appeal received 82 days after denial, where the Director declined motion treatment. Official decision PDF.

• APR192011_02B2203 — Appeal rejected as untimely; returned to Director for possible motion consideration.
  Procedural comparator for appeal sent to wrong office contrary to notice, then received after 33-day deadline. Official decision PDF.

• FEB092022_01B2203 — Combined motions dismissed; prior AAO decision remains in effect.
  Procedural-only comparison for motion timeliness, correct decision identification, and distinguishing underlying final-merits reasoning from later motion posture. Official decision PDF.

• MAR042009_04B2203 — Appeal rejected as untimely; returned to Director to consider as a motion to reconsider if requirements are met.
  Procedural comparator for late appeal returned for Director-level motion consideration; distinguish from rejection without motion treatment and from AAO merits remands. Official decision PDF.

• JAN172007_02B2203 — summary dismissal; AAO concurs with general three-criterion threshold finding
  medium-low Official decision PDF.

• NOV282012_01B2203 — Current motion dismissed; prior AAO decisions affirmed; petition remains denied.
  Procedural motion ruling, unsuitable for substantive EB-1A criteria comparisons; it can belong only in a separate motion practice resource. Official decision PDF.

• APR272015_04B2203 — summary dismissal for failure to identify specific error
  low Official decision PDF.

• JUL232012_02B2203 — Motion to reopen and motion to reconsider dismissed.
  Procedural comparator for a martial-arts case involving an untimely motion submitted directly to AAO. Official decision PDF.

• NOV252008_03B2203 — Appeal rejected as untimely.
  Procedural comparator for an appeal sent to the wrong service center, received late, with no specific appellate argument. Official decision PDF.

• SEP052013_02B2203 — Motion to reopen dismissed; prior May 21, 2010 decision affirmed; petition remains denied.
  Only a successive-motion timeliness/new-evidence explainer; no underlying criteria findings in this decision. Official decision PDF.

• JUL192023_01B2203 — combined motions to reopen and reconsider dismissed
  medium Official decision PDF.

• DEC162005_20B2203 — Motion to reopen dismissed as untimely under 8 C.F.R. § 103.5(a)(1)(i); the decision says no evidence showed the delay was reasonable and beyond petitioner’s control.
  Procedural comparison with motion-timeliness decisions; no EB-1A criterion merits analysis. Official decision PDF.

• FEB182015_02B2203 — Director’s motion decision withdrawn; Remanded for consideration of full record, motion, and appeal evidence; director may issue RFE or NOID.
  Potentially useful only if source identity/date conflict is resolved. Hold from public summary pending verification of the cover date and matching case metadata. 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.