Outcome: Remanded
APR272026_01B2203
Our summary
An AI consulting firm sought EB-1A classification for a chief technology officer. The AAO found the beneficiary met the judging criterion on appeal, satisfying three total criteria. The matter was remanded for a final merits determination on whether the beneficiary demonstrates sustained acclaim and placement at the very top of the field.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
What the AAO accepted
- Awards · SCOPS granted criterion; AAO affirmed
- Judging · AAO found beneficiary participated as judge of others' work in field
- Scholarly articles · SCOPS granted criterion; AAO affirmed
What was missing
Every criterion in the table was found met.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | SCOPS granted criterion; AAO affirmed | |
| Met | AAO found beneficiary participated as judge of others' work in field | |
| Met | SCOPS granted criterion; AAO affirmed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or analyzed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Not claimed or analyzed | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed on appeal | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed on appeal | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed on appeal | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed on appeal | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed on appeal | |
| Not reached / not discussed | Not reached; matter remanded for final merits determination after satisfying three criteria |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
