Skip to content
Merito
← Back to results
O-1ASports and athleticsDecided 2015Dismissed

Outcome: Dismissed

FEB182015_01D8101

AwardsNot metMembershipNot metHigh salaryClaimed, not analyzedJudgingClaimed, not analyzedLeading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met

Our summary

The beneficiary is a head squash coach for whom O-1A classification in athletics was sought. Claims covered awards, membership, and other criteria tied to coaching roles. The AAO dismissed the appeal because three criteria were not established and the aggregate evidence did not show sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing.

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 · Petitioner did not contest the director's finding, so the issue was treated as abandoned and unestablished.
  • Membership · Coaching a team is a role, not membership in an association requiring outstanding achievements judged by experts.
  • Final merits · Evidence in the aggregate did not show sustained acclaim or standing among the small percentage at the top.

Criteria

CriterionReadingWhy
AwardsNot metPetitioner did not contest the director's finding, so the issue was treated as abandoned and unestablished.
MembershipNot metCoaching a team is a role, not membership in an association requiring outstanding achievements judged by experts.
High salaryClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed in the retained text; salary mentioned only in the aggregate discussion.
JudgingClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed in the retained text; only referenced as inherent coaching duties.
Leading or critical roleClaimed, not analyzedClaimed but not analyzed in the retained text; prior coaching roles were deferred to this criterion.
Final meritsNot metEvidence in the aggregate did not show sustained acclaim or standing among the small percentage at the top.

A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.

Similar decisions

Decisions whose text is closest to this one.