Outcome: Dismissed
AUG252025_01B2203
Our summary
A media entrepreneur working in digital marketing sought extraordinary ability classification on her own behalf. She claimed many evidentiary criteria, and the appeal addressed awards, published material, original contributions and possibly scholarly articles. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the evidence lacked award criteria, proof of major media status, and proof of contributions of major significance.
Official PDF
Official PDF ↗Published by USCIS. The summary is ours, in our own words; the decision text is on uscis.gov.
No criterion in the table was found met in this decision.
What was missing
- Awards · No evidence of the criteria used to grant the awards, their recognition, or their link to excellence in the field.
- Original contributions · Recommendation letters and company impact evidence did not show contributions of major significance in the field.
- Published material · No circulation data or other evidence showing the publications are major media.
- Final merits · Record does not show sustained acclaim or a place among the small percentage at the top.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Not met | No evidence of the criteria used to grant the awards, their recognition, or their link to excellence in the field. | |
| Not met | Recommendation letters and company impact evidence did not show contributions of major significance in the field. | |
| Not met | No circulation data or other evidence showing the publications are major media. | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in the condensed text; the regulation is only quoted in a footnote. | |
| Not met | Record does not show sustained acclaim or a place among the small percentage at the top. |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
