Outcome: Dismissed
AUG172026_03B2203
Our summary
A franchise development businessman sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed ten criteria and demonstrated two: published material and judging. The AAO affirmed denial, finding he failed to meet at least three criteria, satisfied no major award, and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.
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
- Judging · Petitioner fulfilled criterion for participation as judge of others' work.
- Published material · Petitioner fulfilled criterion for published materials about him in professional publications.
What was missing
- Awards · Petitioner did not demonstrate receipt of nationally or internationally recognized awards or prizes for excellence in business franchise development.
- Membership · Petitioner did not establish membership in associations requiring outstanding achievement judged by recognized experts in franchise development field.
- Final merits · Petitioner did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement among top of field.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Petitioner fulfilled criterion for participation as judge of others' work. | |
| Met | Petitioner fulfilled criterion for published materials about him in professional publications. | |
| Not met | Petitioner did not demonstrate receipt of nationally or internationally recognized awards or prizes for excellence in business franchise development. | |
| Not met | Petitioner did not establish membership in associations requiring outstanding achievement judged by recognized experts in franchise development field. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed. | |
| Not met | Petitioner did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement among top of field. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
