Published AAO appeal decisions

A beamline scientist at a Department of Energy facility claimed extraordinary ability under seven criteria. The AAO found three initial criteria met but concluded the totality of evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of the field, therefore dismissing the appeal.

Clinical research scientist in neurology sought EB-2 NIW for COVID-19 related research. SCOPS found substantial merit but not national importance; AAO affirmed. Petitioner failed to show how her specific proposed endeavor would have broader implications or significant prospective impact distinct from general field importance.

Physician with cardio-oncology research proposed advancing treatment of cardiovascular diseases in cancer patients. AAO found research met national importance but his published work lacked evidence of driving field progress or generating relevant party interest, failing the well-positioned prong.

Toxicologist sponsored by employer for research in health and safety risk assessment sought national interest waiver. AAO found endeavor had merit and beneficiary well positioned, but waiver not warranted because labor certification was not shown impractical and no urgent national interest was demonstrated.

A postdoctoral research scientist in regenerative medicine sought EB-1A classification. The AAO dismissed because she met only one of three required criteria: judging lacked specificity and original contributions lacked evidence of major significance to the overall field.