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
771 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- EB-1AFilm, music, performing artsFeb 2023Dismissed
Television and motion picture producer claimed five criteria for EB-1A. AAO rejected published material, judging, and critical role findings; awards and exhibitions not reached. Fewer than three criteria met; no demonstrated sustained acclaim.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureFeb 2023Dismissed
A photographer and business owner from Brazil claimed extraordinary ability through seven criteria. The AAO found two criteria met: published material and exhibition display. However, the petitioner failed to establish three qualifying criteria and lacks sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.
2 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIFeb 2023Dismissed
Network communications professional claimed eight criteria for extraordinary ability. Director found two criteria met. Petitioner on appeal reasserted three additional criteria on appeal but failed to overcome deficiencies in evidence or explain how Director erred. AAO held petitioner did not meet the extra criteria and lacked sustained acclaim for top-of-field status.
2 of 9 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureFeb 2023Dismissed
Photographer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Claimed four criteria: awards, published material, exhibitions, and critical role. AAO rejected all four findings; none met regulatory requirements. No sustained acclaim established.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureJan 2023Dismissed
Folk and classical singer from Armenia claimed eight criteria beyond those Director found met. AAO affirmed Director's finding of two criteria met but found petitioner failed to establish three criteria total required. Final merits analysis concluded no sustained national or international acclaim demonstrating top-tier status.
2 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athleticsJan 2023Dismissed
Bodybuilder claimed extraordinary ability through five criteria. AAO found none met: membership based only on regional contest win; published material in non-qualifying venues; critical role lacking evidence of organizational distinction. No sustained acclaim demonstrated.
0 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEntrepreneurshipJan 2023Dismissed
Entrepreneur and business executive sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met only one of three required criteria (published material about him). AAO rejected awards, membership, judging, and leading role claims. No major recognized award. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet initial evidentiary threshold.
1 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEducation and academiaJan 2023Dismissed
A vocational agriculture teacher sought EB-1A classification. He claimed membership, scholarly articles, and critical role criteria. The AAO found he did not establish major award status or three alternate criteria. His association memberships did not require outstanding achievements, articles were unpublished or not in major media, and teaching work was not a critical role. Appeal dismissed.
0 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AMarketing, media, communicationsJan 2023Dismissed
Event producer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met initial evidentiary criteria but AAO found evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or position among top event producers. Single media mention and isolated judging instance do not establish required level of achievement.
1 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AHealthcare, clinicalJan 2023Dismissed
Self-petitioner, physician specializing in clinical and other medicine, sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met only two of ten criteria: scholarly articles and judging. Failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or recognition as top practitioner. Record shows accomplished but not extraordinarily able physician.
2 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and management2023Dismissed
Self-petitioner, business supply chain software specialist, sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met only one of three required criteria (published material). AAO rejected membership in professional associations and leading role claims due to insufficient evidence and timing issues. Appeal dismissed.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2023Dismissed
Comics creator and illustrator self-petitioning for EB-1A extraordinary ability claimed three criteria. AAO found one criterion met: a nationally recognized Venezuelan award for excellence in plastic arts. Published material and leading critical role claims were rejected. Appeal dismissed because only two of ten required criteria established.
1 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ALaw, policy, social science2023Dismissed
A pastor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification through Christian missions work. Although the director found four criteria met, the AAO reversed three findings on review and affirmed only published material. With only one criterion met, the petitioner failed to meet the three-criterion threshold and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.
1 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2023Dismissed
Entrepreneur with twenty years accounting and finance experience in pharmaceutical industry seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability in business. AAO held only two of ten criteria met; three-criterion threshold not satisfied; no major award or exceptional recognition; appeal dismissed.
2 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2023Dismissed
Fashion designer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed four criteria beyond the one (exhibitions) the director conceded. AAO found petitioner met only one criterion, falling short of three required, and held overall record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among top of field.
1 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEnergy and climateDec 2022Dismissed
Oil and gas construction specialist with master's degree sought EB-1A classification. Petitioner claimed five criteria; service center found two met (judging, scholarly articles). AAO affirmed two criteria met but found petitioner did not demonstrate extraordinary ability—lacking the sustained national or international acclaim required for the very top tier of the field.
2 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFilm, music, performing artsNov 2022Dismissed
A film and media editor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Though he met only one criterion (exhibitions), the AAO rejected awards and leading role findings due to insufficient documentation. He failed to meet the three-criterion threshold and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ALife sciences and medicineNov 2022Remanded
Senior life science product consultant claimed extraordinary ability through six criteria. Director found two met. AAO found three criteria satisfied and withdrew denial, requiring final merits review to assess sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.
3 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AMechanical and aerospace engineeringNov 2022Dismissed
Aerospace technology specialist in air transportation modeling claiming extraordinary ability. Met scholarly articles and judging criteria but failed membership, original contributions, and leading role criteria. Only two of ten criteria established despite claiming four additional. Appeal dismissed for insufficient evidence of top-tier recognition.
2 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureNov 2022Dismissed
Self-petitioner speech and theatrical coach sought EB-1A classification. Met three preliminary criteria: judging, published material, critical role. AAO dismissed appeal because evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.
3 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementNov 2022Dismissed
Chief executive officer and solutions architect claimed four criteria including membership, published material, leading role, and high salary. AAO found none met. YPO membership lacked demonstrated outstanding achievement standard. Published materials insufficient in prominence or attribution. Executive experience alone does not establish upper echelon status required.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASoftware engineeringOct 2022Dismissed
A solution director in supply chain and manufacturing technology sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming four criteria. The Director accepted two. The AAO found only judging satisfied, rejected original contributions and leading role, treated scholarly articles as waived, and dismissed because acclaim was confined to employers and collaborators.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIOct 2022Remanded
Chief technology officer seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO remanded because director misclassified petitioner's field of endeavor; petitioner asserted multidisciplinary expertise but director evaluated narrow specialty only, requiring RFE for field clarification before criteria assessment.
1 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIOct 2022Dismissed
An entrepreneur and researcher in cybersecurity on O-1 visa sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO affirmed dismissal, finding he satisfied only two of ten criteria and thus failed the initial threshold, with aggregate review showing insufficient acclaim and recognition required for the classification.
2 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AHealthcare, clinicalOct 2022Dismissed
A radiologist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification met the threshold evidentiary criteria but failed the final merits determination. The AAO found that while the petitioner demonstrated substantial accomplishments and institutional affiliations, the evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of nuclear medicine.
6 of 8 criteria metRead →
