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
376 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- EB-1AHealthcare, clinical2019Dismissed
A surgeon sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner met judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed to demonstrate high salary through proper comparisons or original contributions of major significance. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.
2 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2019Dismissed
Digital graphics designer employed by a company seeks EB-1A classification claiming awards, published material, leading role, and high salary. AAO found only leading role criterion met. Award lacked proof of national recognition, articles were about company not individual, and salary lacked comparative evidence. Appeal dismissed.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AElectrical and electronic engineering2019Dismissed
Senior staff electrical engineer seeks EB-1A classification claiming judging, scholarly articles, and original contributions of major significance. AAO found judging and scholarly articles met but original contributions lacked evidence of major field significance. Only two criteria satisfied; appeal dismissed.
2 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AI2019Dismissed
Chief technology officer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO found only one criterion clearly met (judging) and concluded record lacked sustained national or international acclaim or placement at top of field, dismissing appeal.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athletics2019Sustained
Field hockey coach employed by university. Met three initial criteria: published material, leading critical role, and high salary. Final merits analysis found sustained national and international acclaim through coaching clinics, publications, and extensive recognition. Appeal sustained; extraordinary ability classification approved.
4 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AElectrical and electronic engineering2019Dismissed
Senior electrical engineer and project manager sponsored by employer. Met judging, scholarly articles, and high salary criteria but failed final merits. Despite satisfying three initial criteria, record insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim or status among very top professionals in field.
3 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athletics2019Dismissed
A gymnastics school petitioned for a gymnast-turned-coach as an athlete of extraordinary ability, claiming five of ten criteria. The AAO found the awards criterion met but rejected membership and published material, and the record did not show three criteria satisfied. The appeal was dismissed, with no full final merits analysis.
1 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AMechanical and aerospace engineering2019Dismissed
Industrial engineer employed as principal engineer sought EB-1A classification. Director found two criteria met (scholarly articles and high salary). Petitioner claimed third criterion regarding critical role; AAO rejected it. Three-criterion threshold not met; final merits not required.
2 of 9 criteria metRead → - EB-1APhysics and astronomy2019Dismissed
An applied physicist employed as an engineer sought EB-1A classification. He met two initial criteria (judging and scholarly articles) but failed to establish a third. The AAO dismissed the appeal because his original contributions lack demonstrated major significance and his accomplishments do not show sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.
2 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABiotech and pharma2019Sustained
A senior director in project management for a pharmaceutical company met three required criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and high salary. The AAO affirmed on final merits that his sustained international acclaim, conference presentations, R&D facility design, and field recognition demonstrate he is among the very top.
4 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1ALife sciences and medicine2019Dismissed
A research scientist in public health claiming extraordinary ability presented evidence of judging and scholarly articles. The AAO dismissed the appeal because although two criteria were met, the third claimed criterion on original contributions of major significance failed: the evaluation plan lacked evidence of pre-filing implementation or major field-wide impact.
2 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABiotech and pharma2019Dismissed
A molecular diagnostics company employed a scientist claiming extraordinary ability in sciences. Director found four criteria met, but AAO reversed original contributions and high salary findings. With only two criteria solidly met and no showing of sustained national acclaim at field's top, appeal dismissed.
2 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2019Dismissed
Record label petitions for creative director as EB-1A extraordinary ability in arts. Beneficiary met two criteria (leading role, high salary) but petition failed because petitioner could not demonstrate three minimum criteria: awards were not nationally recognized, membership lacked evidence of outstanding achievement requirements, and published material lacked proper documentation.
2 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-1ALife sciences and medicine2018Sustained
A neuroscience postdoctoral researcher sought EB-1A classification, meeting three initial criteria: judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles. The AAO sustained the appeal, finding the totality of evidence demonstrates sustained national and international acclaim and established that the petitioner is among the very top of the field through high citation rates and widespread research implementation.
4 of 4 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-1AComputer science and AI2018Dismissed
Software engineer at memory storage company claimed extraordinary ability based on awards, judging, publications, and salary. AAO found judging and publications met but awards insufficient, original contributions unproven despite citations, and salary merely above median. Dismissed because only two criteria met and final merits lacking.
2 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEnergy and climate2018Dismissed
A petroleum engineer and manager at a multinational company met three initial criteria but lacked national or international acclaim in the aggregate. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding his recognition limited to his employer rather than the field.
3 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-1AData science and analytics2018Dismissed
Data scientist employed by software company for agricultural analytics sought EB-1A classification. Petitioner claimed seven criteria and argued three were met. AAO found three criteria satisfied but determined evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or small percentage status required for extraordinary ability.
3 of 10 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and management2018Sustained
An assistant research professor in business met three criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and critical role. The AAO sustained on final merits, finding high citation impact, sustained publications, widespread software use, significant patents, and innovation demonstrate he ranks among the very top in his field.
4 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athletics2017Dismissed
Martial artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in athletics. AAO found he met only two criteria and withdrew the director's favorable determinations on two others, concluding he failed to meet the required three initial criteria and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and management2017Dismissed
A humanitarian aid organization petitioned for beneficiary co-founder of human rights organizations in Nigeria. Director found one criterion met; beneficiary met only leading or critical role. Appeals of awards and published material criteria failed. AAO dismissed for meeting only one of three required criteria.
1 of 4 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-1ALife sciences and medicine2017Dismissed
A research analyst sought EB-1A classification. The AAO confirmed two criteria met: manuscript review and scholarly article authorship. Even assuming a third criterion satisfied, the aggregate evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the very top of the field.
2 of 4 criteria metRead →
