Published AAO appeal decisions

Marathon runner sought EB-1A classification based on race medals and organizational memberships. Petitioner submitted photographs of awards and participation certificates without corroborating documentation. AAO found evidence showed participation in numerous marathons but no performance indicating national or international acclaim.

Veterinarian and laboratory head sought EB-1A classification on self-petition. Claimant submitted evidence of VPAP award, professional memberships, conference paper presentation, and board certification. AAO found award criteria reflected service length rather than excellence, memberships lacked outstanding achievement requirement, and no comparative salary documentation provided.

Amateur kickboxer seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed awards from Asian Games and amateur championships; national team participation. AAO affirmed director's finding that petitioner failed to meet awards criterion and did not establish requisite acclaim. Appeal dismissed for failure to specifically address errors.

Swimmer and coach petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field either as athlete or coach. AAO found no evidence of intention to continue in area of expertise and dismissed appeal for failing to meet EB-1A requirements.

Actor petitioner claimed extraordinary ability and met three regulatory criteria: awards, published material, and judging. AAO affirmed all three were satisfied and found the totality of evidence demonstrated sustained national acclaim and extraordinary ability qualifying for EB-1A classification.

Singer petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field. AAO found awards too dated, published material evidence inadequate, judging and original contributions criteria unmet, and dismissed appeal for insufficient extraordinary ability evidence.

Physician petitioner claimed extraordinary ability but failed to meet three regulatory criteria: awards, membership, and published material. AAO found no sustained national or international acclaim at field top and dismissed appeal; employment gaps and lack of U.S. licensure further weighed against EB-1A eligibility.

Karate trainer and former athlete petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed lesser awards criterion. AAO found submitted certificates lacked evidence of national or international recognition and petitioner failed to establish sustained acclaim at the very top of the field.

Postdoctoral researcher in sciences claimed extraordinary ability under awards, membership, and published material criteria. AAO found petitioner met one criterion (membership in Sigma Xi and ASBMB) but failed to meet required threshold of at least three criteria. Evidence showed postdoctoral talent but insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field.

Television director in noncommercial television claimed extraordinary ability under seven criteria including major awards, PGA membership, and original contributions. AAO found petitioner did not receive major internationally recognized award and PGA membership did not meet criterion. Evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field.

Traditional medicine practitioner claimed extraordinary ability but failed to show sustained national or international acclaim. AAO found no major awards, publications in major media, or evidence of judging. Misuse of physician titles and credentials raised questions about prospective benefit, warranting dismissal.

Comic book author claimed extraordinary ability but failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim. AAO found local awards, inappropriate association membership, and limited-circulation publications insufficient. Evidence did not show petitioner at very top of field.

Self-represented petitioner claimed extraordinary ability but failed to meet award and membership criteria. Awards lacked substantiation and were received over a decade before filing, failing to establish sustained acclaim. No evidence of three regulatory criteria met.

Trampoline and acrobatics competitor claimed extraordinary ability based on youth-level awards. AAO found awards limited to junior competitions and lacked national or international standing. Evidence insufficient to show sustained acclaim at very top of field.

Business professional claimed extraordinary ability in business through awards and membership criteria. AAO found NBIA Incubator Innovation Award insufficient due to limited scope and newness, membership criterion unmet, and overall evidence failing to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top.

A self-petitioner dance instructor claimed extraordinary ability through awards, membership, and published material. The AAO found awards from youth events insufficient, membership requirements did not reflect outstanding achievement, and published material lacked proper documentation. Overall evidence did not demonstrate top-level sustained acclaim.

Kickboxer sought EB-1A classification. Petitioner claimed awards and association membership criteria. AAO rejected awards as insufficiently recent or nationally recognized, and found association membership did not require outstanding achievement. Overall evidence insufficient to show extraordinary ability.

A Georgian folk singer and choirmaster self-petitioner claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability in the arts. He asserted five criteria: awards, membership, judging, original contributions, and high salary. The AAO found none met and concluded his work with Ensemble Kutaisi, while moderately successful, did not establish top-level sustained acclaim.

An opera singer petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability. She submitted evidence of a Thierry Mermod Prize and student competition awards. The AAO found the major award did not constitute major international recognition and student competition awards do not evidence top-level acclaim, dismissing the appeal.

A pianist applied for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed three criteria: lesser awards, membership, and published material. The AAO found each criterion not met and concluded the evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of music performance.

A swimmer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability in athletics. The AAO found the petitioner met the membership criterion via Russian national team participation but withdrew director's finding on awards after noting post-filing awards were ineligible. Overall, evidence of moderate success did not establish sustained international acclaim at the very top, dismissing the appeal.

A self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in athletics. The AAO found that counsel never specified which regulatory criteria were met, analyzed the most applicable evidence under awards criterion, and concluded neither the scholarship nor collegiate awards demonstrated sustained acclaim at the very top, dismissing the appeal.

A gastroenterologist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability in the sciences. The AAO upheld the director's finding that the petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top, finding academic awards and a single video presentation insufficient, and dismissing the appeal.

Competitive shooter and shooting instructor claiming extraordinary ability in athletics. Petitioner presented awards from competitive shooting career but no evidence of sustained acclaim or student awards during six years preceding petition. AAO held prior competitive achievements insufficient without evidence of sustained excellence or teaching at highest levels.

Architect and web designer claiming extraordinary ability in arts and design. Petitioner claimed meeting criteria for awards and published material based on work inclusion in design publications and books. AAO rejected awards claim and published material claim, finding neither establishment of nationally recognized prizes nor publications about petitioner; aggregate evidence insufficient.