AAO Decisions Explorer · Free
Published AAO appeal decisions
Search the decisions the Administrative Appeals Office has published, narrow them by visa, criterion, field and year, and read our summary of each one with a link to the official PDF.

Decisions in the library
6,586
6,586 classified
Visa types
3
Years covered
2005-2026
Latest decision
Aug 31, 2026
Filters
27 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- EB-1AArts, design, architectureAug 2026Dismissed
Classical music composer seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner met three initial criteria but failed final merits step. AAO held beneficiary did not sufficiently contextualize or compare accomplishments to other renowned composers to show sustained acclaim and elite status.
3 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEntrepreneurshipAug 2026Dismissed
Health technology company petitions for beneficiary as EB-1A extraordinary ability individual. Beneficiary met six of eight claimed evidentiary criteria, but AAO affirmed denial, finding evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the very top of technology entrepreneurship field.
6 of 10 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureJun 2026Dismissed
A wedding dress designer claimed six EB-1A criteria. AAO withdrew USCIS findings on three criteria and found none met. Published materials, exhibitions, and leading role determinations lacked sufficient evidence. Petitioner failed to establish three criteria threshold for extraordinary ability.
0 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIJun 2026Dismissed
Software development company petitioning for CEO beneficiary for EB-1A extraordinary ability. USCIS approved three criteria; AAO withdrew original contributions finding, leaving only two criteria met. Final merits determination failed to show top-tier standing, dismissing appeal.
2 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEntrepreneurshipJun 2026Dismissed
An employer petitioned for a technology entrepreneur seeking extraordinary ability (EB-1A). Claimed seven criteria initially; director found two met (judging, leading role). On appeal, petitioner claimed five others. AAO found awards and membership unmet and declined to analyze remaining criteria, reserving final merits because threshold initial evidence requirements not satisfied.
2 of 9 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIApr 2026Dismissed
Software engineering manager in cloud computing and AI-driven platforms sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO dismissed the appeal because although the petitioner met three initial criteria, the totality of evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or that he ranks among the very top of his field.
3 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ACivil and environmental engineeringJan 2026Dismissed
Transportation architect with master's degree and H-1B work history claimed seven criteria for extraordinary ability. AAO found three criteria met: judging, scholarly articles, and leading roles. On final merits, AAO determined petitioner failed to show sustained national or international acclaim or recognition required for top-tier classification.
3 of 9 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFilm, music, performing artsJan 2026Dismissed
An audio-visual agency filed for a cinematographer and drone cameraman with extraordinary ability. The AAO found he met two criteria (judging and exhibitions) but failed the third-criterion threshold and final merits test for sustained acclaim at field leadership level.
2 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureSep 2021Dismissed
A creative technologist employed in interactive multimedia displays petitioned for EB-1A classification. Two criteria were met: critical role and exhibitions. The AAO dismissed the appeal because only two of three required criteria were satisfied and final merits showed no sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level.
2 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureMar 2021Dismissed
An art director and photographer sought EB-1A classification, claiming six criteria. The AAO found four criteria met (awards, published material, judging, exhibitions), exceeding the three-criterion threshold, but dismissed because the totality of evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier status.
4 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureJan 2021Dismissed
Senior UX designer claimed five criteria but met only one reliably. Awards lacked proven recognition; design displays served promotional rather than artistic purposes. Insufficient criteria met and no evidence of sustained national acclaim at field top.
1 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureSep 2020Dismissed
A software technology company petitioned for its senior creative designer as an extraordinary ability worker, asserting several evidentiary criteria. The AAO found the awards, original contributions and exhibitions criteria unmet, noting the awards belonged to the employer and letters lacked specifics. The evidence did not show sustained acclaim, so the appeal was dismissed.
0 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureApr 2020Dismissed
An artist blacksmith sought extraordinary ability classification. Although the petitioner demonstrated three evidentiary criteria met, the AAO affirmed dismissal because the evidence does not establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the very top in the field.
3 of 9 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASoftware engineeringDec 2019Dismissed
Senior mobile applications developer claimed extraordinary ability via seven criteria. Failed membership, published material, judging, artistic display, and salary criteria. Did not reach leading role or original contributions claims. Record lacks sustained acclaim and top-tier status for developer.
0 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2018Dismissed
Ballet dancer and instructor petitioned by ballet company. Claimed four criteria: exhibitions, awards, published material, and leading/critical role. AAO found only exhibitions met, rejecting awards for lack of recognition evidence, published material for insufficient focus and source quality, and critical role for failure to show responsibility for organizational success.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2018Dismissed
Salon employing artistic director and master hair colorist sought extraordinary ability classification in arts. Failed to meet three initial criteria. Published material was brief listing; original contributions lacked major significance; exhibition evidence insufficient. No one-time achievement demonstrated.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFilm, music, performing arts2018Dismissed
A violinist seeks EB-1A classification through an employer petitioner. Claimed judging, exhibitions, published material, membership and awards. AAO found three criteria met but dismissed appeal because evidence does not demonstrate sustained international acclaim or placement among the very top violinists.
2 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2017Sustained
An architect with over 25 years experience sought EB-1A classification. The AAO found four criteria met: published material, exhibitions, leading role for distinguished organization, and high salary. The aggregate evidence demonstrated sustained national acclaim and placement among the very top of the field.
5 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFilm, music, performing arts2016Dismissed
A college television station petitioned for a cinematographer and broadcast associate as an artist of extraordinary ability. The appeals office found two criteria satisfied, exhibitions and critical role, and withdrew the director's judging finding. Awards, published material and original contributions failed, so the minimum of three was not reached and the appeal was dismissed.
2 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEducation and academia2014Dismissed
An employer-sponsored EB-1A petition for a beneficiary failed. The petitioner abandoned the judging criterion on appeal. The exhibitions criterion did not apply as beneficiary performed, not visual arts. The petitioner did not establish three qualifying criteria, failing the basic regulatory requirement for extraordinary ability classification.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2009Dismissed
An artist with counsel sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Awards did not meet standards; membership organizations lacked outstanding achievement requirements; publications were not about the artist; exhibitions were sporadic and early-dated. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim at the highest level.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2008Dismissed
Employer-sponsored petition for miniaturist artist claiming extraordinary ability through awards and exhibitions. AAO reversed one director finding on exhibitions but upheld dismissal, finding only two criteria met instead of required three. Evidence showed talent but not the sustained national acclaim required for top-tier field status.
1 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2007Dismissed
A stage show director in Philippines seeking EB-1A claimed three criteria met. The AAO rejected the awards, published material, and exhibitions criteria as failing to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim, and dismissed the appeal because the evidence did not establish extraordinary ability.
0 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2007Dismissed
Oil painter filed EB-1A petition with evidence of exhibitions in multiple countries. AAO found exhibitions criterion met but rejected awards, membership, and publications as lacking national or international recognition. Overall evidence insufficient to establish extraordinary ability at field's apex.
1 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2006Dismissed
Creative concept advertising artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed original contributions and exhibition achievements through client work and student shows. AAO found client endorsements vague, work not properly credited in artistic venues, and evidence insufficient to demonstrate top-level field standing.
0 of 3 criteria metRead →
