EB-1ASports and athleticsIndividualDecided June 2025Dismissed
Outcome: Dismissed
JUN102025_01B2203
Leading or critical roleMetAwardsNot metMembershipNot metJudgingClaimed, not analyzedOriginal contributionsClaimed, not analyzedPublished materialClaimed, not analyzedScholarly articlesClaimed, not analyzedFinal meritsNot met
Our summary
Squash coach who competed as junior player claimed four evidentiary criteria on appeal. AAO found only membership and critical role met, with one criterion established on appeal. Final merits determination found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or status among very top of 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
- Leading or critical role · SCOPS determined petitioner met this criterion without explanation; AAO did not disturb this finding
What was missing
- Awards · Awards from age-restricted competitions do not face full field competition; not nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in field
- Membership · Membership requirements based on employment, education or experience, and payment of dues do not constitute outstanding achievements
- Final merits · Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that petitioner is among small percentage at very top of field
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
 Leading or critical role | Met | SCOPS determined petitioner met this criterion without explanation; AAO did not disturb this finding |
 Awards | Not met | Awards from age-restricted competitions do not face full field competition; not nationally or internationally recognized for excellence in field |
 Membership | Not met | Membership requirements based on employment, education or experience, and payment of dues do not constitute outstanding achievements |
 Judging | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed; record does not substantiate judging role meeting regulatory requirements |
 Original contributions | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision |
 Published material | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but AAO found petitioner did not meet criterion; specific analysis of published material criterion not detailed |
 Scholarly articles | Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but not analyzed in decision |
 Final merits | Not met | Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that petitioner is among small percentage at very top of field |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.