Outcome: Dismissed
SEP262025_01B2203
Our summary
A former judge seeks extraordinary ability classification based on judicial work in Armenia. The AAO found the petitioner met only the original contributions criterion and one criterion already accepted by the service center, falling short of the required three criteria. Appeal dismissed because threshold initial evidence requirements were not satisfied.
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 · Service center found criterion met; decision did not disturb this finding
- Original contributions · AAO concluded petitioner met this criterion on de novo review
What was missing
- Awards · No major internationally recognized award shown
- Leading or critical role · No evidence of distinguished reputation of judicial institutions; AAO withdrew SCOPS conclusion
Criteria
| Criterion | Reading | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Met | Service center found criterion met; decision did not disturb this finding | |
| Met | AAO concluded petitioner met this criterion on de novo review | |
| Not met | No major internationally recognized award shown | |
| Not met | No evidence of distinguished reputation of judicial institutions; AAO withdrew SCOPS conclusion | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but decision does not analyze this criterion | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but decision does not analyze this criterion | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but decision does not analyze this criterion | |
| Claimed, not analyzed | Claimed but decision does not analyze this criterion | |
| Not reached / not discussed | Not reached; AAO declined to analyze sustained acclaim after finding fewer than three criteria met |
A published decision describes one case. It is not legal advice and not a prediction for yours.
