Published AAO appeal decisions

Molecular geneticist claiming extraordinary ability in sciences. Petitioner claimed meeting criteria for awards, membership, published material, judging, and scholarly articles. AAO rejected all criterion claims, finding thesis award recognized academic rather than professional excellence, insufficient publication impact, limited judging scope, and modest citation record. Aggregate evidence showed talent but not top-tier distinction.

Mountain climber sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in athletics. Met awards criterion with presidential medal; failed membership and published material criteria. Evidence of only one criterion met insufficient; no demonstration of sustained national acclaim or top percentile of field.

Traditional Albanian folk singer claimed extraordinary ability through awards, publications, original contributions, and critical roles in performances. AAO found no major international award and fewer than three criteria met, with outdated evidence of acclaim prior to filing.

Research scientist self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability through awards, membership, publications, and original contributions. AAO dismissed appeal, finding only original contributions criterion satisfied but insufficient overall to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at top level.

Pianist self-petitioner sought EB-1A classification claiming extraordinary ability through membership, published material, and commercial success. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to meet three regulatory criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim warranting top-tier classification.

Acrobatic performer sought EB-1A classification through awards, publications, and contributions. AAO found petitioner is accomplished but lacks sustained national or international acclaim at very top level, with awards stale, no recent performances documented, and no commercial success demonstrated.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A classification based on awards, memberships, and published material. AAO found all evidence reflected only local recognition and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Petitioner claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. AAO held petitioner failed to meet three regulatory criteria and dismissed appeal with finding of fraud because petitioner knowingly submitted falsified documents material to eligibility determination.

Research scientist in malaria and life sciences claimed extraordinary ability based on awards, publications, peer review, and contributions. AAO affirmed denial, finding petitioner had not established sustained national or international acclaim or place among small percentage at top of field despite showing research talent.

Research scientist in molecular biology claimed extraordinary ability in sciences. Submitted evidence of patents, scholarly articles, and published materials. AAO found two criteria satisfied but three required; evidence showed talent and potential but not sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. Appeal dismissed.

Fine artist petitioned for extraordinary ability classification claiming awards, judging, and published material. AAO found awards lacked national recognition, judging criterion unmet as residencies are not prizes, and publications in small media insufficient. Evidence did not demonstrate sustained acclaim at very top national or international level.

Pianist holding O-1 visa sought EB-1A classification. Evidence included local performances and newspaper reviews. AAO found standards dramatically different between O-1 and EB-1A, dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to meet three criteria or show sustained acclaim at very top level.

Software engineer petitioner claimed four criteria for extraordinary ability classification. AAO found the awards criterion met but withdrawn published material and original contributions criteria as not meeting acclaim standard. Scholarly articles criterion also failed. Overall, evidence insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.

Artist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability in the arts. Petitioner submitted evidence relating to awards, publications, scholarly articles, leading role, and commercial success criteria. AAO held none met; no sustained acclaim demonstrated and record contained no evidence of sustained acclaim after U.S. entry.