Which EB-1A criteria were counted in this case?

Criteria claimed: 3, counted: 3 (Awards, Published material about you, Judging).

How did this appeal end?

The case was remanded: the AAO withdrew the decision and sent it back to the officer - not a final approval, but not a final denial either.

Did the case reach the final-merits stage?

Yes, but on the final-merits totality assessment the petitioner fell short - the criteria were only the entry gate.

All EB-1A appeals

case remandedArts20213 criteria counted

Writer (Fiction and Non-Fiction)

AAO appeal decision on the EB-1A talent visa

Updated: September 10, 2026Author: Alina Kanametova

This is a real, anonymized AAO appeal decision on the EB-1A immigrant visa, in the field of Writer (Fiction and Non-Fiction) (Arts), 2021. The appeal was case remanded, and on the final-merits determination the petitioner did not clearly meet the standard. Of the regulatory criteria, 3 were counted: Awards, Published material about you, Judging.

What this case shows

Bottom line: the case went back to the officer for another look, not a final decision. Of the 3 EB-1A criteria claimed, 3 were counted. The criteria were enough to reach final merits, but on the totality of the evidence the petitioner fell short of the extraordinary-ability standard - 3+ criteria alone do not guarantee approval.

EB-1A criteria in this case

Awardscounted
Membershipnot claimed
Published material about youcounted
Judgingcounted
Original contributionnot claimed
Scholarly authorshipnot claimed
Exhibitionsnot claimed
Leading rolenot claimed
High remunerationnot claimed
Commercial successnot claimed
Comparable evidencenot claimed

The Arts field in the database: 343 appeals

Outcomes in this field: 12 sustained, 52 remanded, 279 dismissed. How the AAO ruled in this field on the criteria argued in this case:

Criterion	In this case	Counted in the field	How objections were answered
Awards	counted	44 of 236 (19%)	breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Published material about you	counted	90 of 242 (37%)	breakdowns for this criterion (7)
Judging	counted	117 of 162 (72%)	breakdowns for this criterion (7)

Counted over our base of published AAO decisions; all Arts appeals.

How to read this case

The formal gate was passed: no claimed criterion is marked "not counted", and the case reached the final-merits totality assessment. That is exactly where it was lost: at this stage the officer looks not at the number of criteria but at whether the evidence as a whole shows sustained national or international acclaim. Across the appeals base, 45% of cases are lost at final merits.

From the AAO decision (source, EN)

The decision was remanded due to a deficient final merits determination that focused on peripheral issues and did not provide the petitioner an adequate opportunity to submit corroborating evidence for claims made in support letters regarding pre-2015 recognition. The AAO found that publicity from the petitioner's prosecution does not equate to acclaim for his writing.

The quote summarizes a fragment of the decision; the table above reflects the FINAL status of the criteria across all stages of the case (including ones conceded before the appeal), so the wording may not match one-to-one.

Full AAO decision of July 15, 2021 (PDF, uscis.gov)AAO decisions archive on uscis.gov

FAQ on this case

Which EB-1A criteria were counted in this case?: Criteria claimed: 3, counted: 3 (Awards, Published material about you, Judging).
How did this appeal end?: The case was remanded: the AAO withdrew the decision and sent it back to the officer - not a final approval, but not a final denial either.
Did the case reach the final-merits stage?: Yes, but on the final-merits totality assessment the petitioner fell short - the criteria were only the entry gate.

Terms in this case:RFE (request for evidence)final merits AAO (appeals office)

All EB-1A appeals O-1 / EB-1A criteria Analyze my case Which visa fits

Similar appeals

Same outcome in other fields

Talent visa for Arts What is the US talent visa

This is an anonymized public decision of the USCIS Administrative Appeals Office (AAO), shown for reference. Not legal advice and not a guarantee of your own outcome; every case is decided on its own facts.