Published AAO appeal decisions

An art studio/gallery petitioned for an artist beneficiary for O-1A classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the beneficiary was neither nominated for nor received a qualifying award, and satisfied fewer than three of the six required criteria, failing to demonstrate extraordinary ability in the arts.

Agent petitioned for volleyball athlete beneficiary for O-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed, finding beneficiary failed to meet a major award or three of eight evidentiary criteria; submitted evidence lacked significance documentation and professional publication status.

A yacht management company petitioned for O-1A classification for a beneficiary in business. The AAO found beneficiary met only one evidentiary criterion and dismissed the appeal, concluding she failed to demonstrate the extraordinary ability required.

An agent petitioned for an experimental stage and screen actor under the O-1 category for the motion picture and television industry, which is the O-1B arts classification and not O-1A. The AAO dismissed the appeal because fewer than three evidentiary criteria were met and the evidence as a whole fell short.

A professional bodybuilder did not meet the initial evidence requirements for O-1A classification. The petitioner satisfied only two of eight criteria and failed to establish the requisite sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.

Wrestling coach seeking O-1A nonimmigrant classification. Petitioner did not establish three evidentiary criteria or sustained national/international acclaim. Petition failed procedural requirement of detailed work itinerary. AAO dismissed appeal, finding no demonstration of extraordinary ability.

A copywriter and creative supervisor sought O-1A classification; petitioner abandoned two criteria and failed to meet at least three of the remaining criteria. AAO affirmed dismissal, finding beneficiary did not qualify and comparable evidence was not applicable.

An equestrian rider sought O-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner submitted ribbons and claimed membership but failed to establish three evidentiary criteria. The AAO found the evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

A scientist in the field of international development seeks O-1A classification. Petitioner claimed four criteria and established two: original contributions and scholarly articles. The decision found only two criteria satisfied; at least three are required. Appeal dismissed because beneficiary failed to demonstrate extraordinary ability at the top of the field.

O-1A nonimmigrant petition for business field extraordinary ability. Petitioner failed to establish three required criteria on prior appeal and motion to reconsider. Motion to reconsider dismissed for failure to meet regulatory requirements and incomplete record.

Connecticut religious organization petitioned for O-1A beneficiary with extraordinary ability in business. The AAO affirmed denial because evidence failed to satisfy the published material criterion and petitioner did not establish eligibility under at least three required criteria.

Taekwondo instructor beneficiary sought O-1A nonimmigrant visa for extraordinary ability in athletics. Petitioner claimed three criteria: awards, association membership, and judging experience. AAO dismissed, finding awards were regional not national, membership claim unsubstantiated, and judging criterion unmet; fewer than three criteria satisfied.

A photography consultant sought O-1A extraordinary ability in the arts. The appeal was summarily dismissed because the petitioner failed to identify any erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the service center director's denial, and no further documentation was submitted despite notice of opportunity to do so.