remanded EB-1A
Radio Host
Radio Host · 2025-03-18
This case is from a USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) appeal decision. Appeal cases represent a subset of petitions and may not reflect typical outcomes.
Framework Evaluation
0 of 3 criteria metAwards (Not Met)
The Director's negative determination was withdrawn due to incorrect legal standard application; the criterion remains to be re-evaluated on remand.
Published Material (Not Met)
The Director's negative determination was withdrawn due to incorrect legal standard application; the criterion remains to be re-evaluated on remand.
Judging (Not Met)
The Director's negative determination was withdrawn due to incorrect legal standard application; the criterion remains to be re-evaluated on remand.
High Salary (Not Met)
The Director's negative determination was withdrawn due to incorrect legal standard application; the criterion remains to be re-evaluated on remand.
Why This Petition Was Remanded
The Director's decision was withdrawn because it improperly evaluated whether the evidence established 'sustained national or international acclaim' within the individual criteria analysis. Under the Kazarian framework, this evaluation belongs in the final merits determination, not the initial counting of criteria. The matter is remanded for a proper de novo review of the four claimed criteria: awards, published material, judging, and high salary.
Evidence
Evidence Types
Awards
Media Coverage
Judging Experience
High Salary
Evidence Submitted
- Claimed receipt of a lesser nationally or internationally recognized prize
- Claimed published material about the petitioner relating to his work
- Claimed acting as a judge of the works of others
- Claimed high salary in relation to others in the field
Similar Cases
Writer
Media · Venezuela
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2024-10-04
The Director denied the petition because the petitioner did not establish a major, internationally recognized award and failed to meet three of the ten regulatory criteria. The AAO remanded the case because the Director's decision did not address all additional claims and evidence submitted in response to the RFE regarding awards, original contributions, and the leading/critical role criterion, and therefore an incomplete analysis was performed.
Musician
Music
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2024-08-29
The Director's decision was withdrawn because it contained 'repetitive and generic' language from unrelated cases, depriving the petitioner of a fair adjudication. Specifically, the Director mischaracterized the musician petitioner as a medical professional and failed to address the 'original contributions' criterion entirely. The case was remanded to determine if the petitioner meets at least three of the five claimed criteria: awards, memberships, published material, original contributions, and leading roles.
Entrepreneur
Information Technology
USCIS EB-1A rfe remanded
2024-12-26
The AAO withdrew the Director's decision and remanded the case because the Director's analysis was insufficient. The decision did not adequately explain the reasons for concluding that the Petitioner failed to satisfy five claimed criteria (lesser awards, published materials, original contributions, leading or critical role, and high salary), nor did it discuss the evidence submitted in response to the RFE. The Director's analysis regarding the Petitioner's intent to continue working was also found to be copied verbatim from the RFE, indicating a lack of proper evaluation of the submitted evidence.
Project Manager
Engineering · Jordan
USCIS EB-1A rfe dismissed
2024-07-10
The Petitioner failed to meet any of the evaluated EB-1A criteria. The awards were internal employer recognitions, memberships did not require outstanding achievements judged by experts, and there was no evidence of published material about the Petitioner or proof that his original contributions were of major significance in the field.
Frequently Asked Questions
A remanded EB-1A petition means the case was sent back to the field office for further review. This happens when procedural errors are found or additional evidence should be considered. It is neither an approval nor a denial.
Browse More Cases
Case data sourced from publicly available petition decisions and case studies. Decision date: 2025-03-18.
Browse all casesAt a Glance
Outcome remanded
Criteria Met 0 / 3
Evidence Types 4
EB-1A Case Data
Scraped Case Data
Total Cases 881
Success Rate 52.9%
Sustained 466
Dismissed 299
Related Pages
Get Case Insights
Compare your profile against thousands of real petition outcomes. Join the waitlist for personalized analysis.
Join Waitlist