EB-1ASports and athleticsIndividualDecided 2026Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUL302026_02B2203
AwardsNot metExhibitionsClaimed, not analyzedJudgingClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
A pole and aerial sport performer and instructor claimed four extraordinary ability criteria: awards, published material, judging and exhibitions. On service motion after litigation, the AAO withdrew the earlier awards finding because competition placements were unsupported or not shown to be nationally recognized. It dismissed the appeal, finding neither the threshold nor sustained acclaim established.
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 · Some placements were unsupported and the others were not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized for excellence.
- Final merits · Record did not show sustained acclaim or a place among the small percentage at the top.
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Awards | Not met | Some placements were unsupported and the others were not shown to be nationally or internationally recognized for excellence. |
 Exhibitions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in the available text; overall threshold of three criteria was not met. |
 Judging | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in the available text; overall threshold of three criteria was not met. |
 Published material | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in the available text; overall threshold of three criteria was not met. |
 Final merits | Not met | Record did 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.