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
5 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- EB-1AFinance and economicsJan 2025Remanded
Financial technology company petitions for beneficiary in fintech as extraordinary ability immigrant. Claimed six criteria; director found two met. AAO finds three criteria satisfied: judging, leading role, and scholarly articles via comparable evidence of trade show presentations. Matter remanded for final merits analysis on sustained acclaim.
3 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2025Dismissed
Dismissed · official decision textRead → - O-1AFinance and economicsOct 2024Dismissed
Investment firm petitions for O-1A classification for external managers evaluation specialist. Petitioner failed to submit required advisory opinion and satisfied only two of eight evidentiary criteria. Missing published material documentation and failing to establish three alternate criteria, petition dismissed.
2 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2008Dismissed
A nonprofit research foundation sponsored a policy analyst as extraordinarily able in economics. The AAO rejected student scholarships, professional memberships, media appearances as published material, and judging roles as insufficient. Aggregate evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or top-level achievement.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2006Dismissed
Counsel-represented economist formerly employed by Canadian Department of Finance claims extraordinary ability through awards, publications, critical role, and salary. AAO found witness letters insufficient primary evidence, publications not in major media, role subordinate, and salary unexceptional. Overall evidence failed to demonstrate top-tier status.
0 of 5 criteria metRead →
