Published AAO appeal decisions

A human resources manager at a cryptocurrency finance company sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed seven criteria; director found two met. AAO affirmed, rejecting membership in professional associations, judging participation, and scholarly articles as insufficiently documented, and found the aggregate record did not demonstrate the sustained acclaim required.

Swimmer met three initial evidentiary criteria: awards, membership, and published material. However, on final merits analysis, AAO found petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim, failed to document complete competition record, showed no recent major achievements, and does not rank among small percentage at field's very top.

An orthopedic surgeon seeking extraordinary ability classification as scientific advisor met only one of required three criteria through judging. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner did not establish high salary comparatives or critical role at a distinguished institution, and failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.

A fashion model claims extraordinary ability. She met only the judging criterion but failed awards, published material, original contributions, exhibitions, and leading role criteria. She lacked documentation for commercial success. With only one criterion met, she falls short of the three required.

Martial artist competing in international events sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner claimed six criteria but satisfied none. The AAO found awards lacked national or international recognition, membership not based on expert judgment, published material insufficient, and judging role not demonstrated. Two additional criteria were not reached because the petitioner failed the initial three-criterion requirement.

A television presenter and actress sought extraordinary ability classification. Although satisfying the display criterion through television and fashion work, she met only one of three required criteria. The AAO affirmed dismissal due to insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim or top-tier standing in the field.

Martial artist serving as regional federation officer claimed awards, published material, judging, and leading role. The AAO found awards lacked national recognition, media sources were not major publications, service as referee did not constitute judging, and did not reach the leading role claim. Appeal dismissed.

A Turkish filmmaker claimed extraordinary ability through six criteria. Director found three met: awards, judging, and exhibitions. AAO affirmed three criteria were met but found the totality of evidence insufficient for sustained international acclaim and top-of-field status required by statute.

Singer self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in performing arts. AAO found petitioner did not meet any three required initial criteria: awards lacked verifiable national or international recognition, association membership did not require outstanding achievements, and published material in Albanian outlets did not demonstrate substantial recognition.

A photographer seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claimed four criteria: published material, media coverage, original contributions, and exhibitions. The AAO found only exhibitions established and rejected the others for lack of major significance, insufficient publication credentials, and absence of evidence showing sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the very top.

A culinary chef and gastronomic consultant sought extraordinary ability classification in the arts. The service center found one criterion met, and he claimed five more on appeal. The AAO found awards, membership, published material, judging and contributions unproven, so fewer than three criteria were satisfied and acclaim was not shown.

A Latin reggae musician sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found he met three initial criteria: published material, judging, and performance displays. However, the final merits determination failed because the petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim after his band dissolved in 2012.

Postdoctoral scholar and environmental sustainability fellow in life sciences seeks extraordinary ability classification. Claims six criteria beyond judging. AAO affirms only judging criterion met; insufficient evidence of three required criteria or status among top percentage in field.

A photographer self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO found he met two of ten criteria: published material and exhibitions. The appeal was dismissed because the evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or that he ranks among the small percentage at the very top of photography.

Art director and visual effects artist sought EB-1A classification. Met three criteria: published material, exhibitions, and awards. However, AAO found single award eight years prior and limited press coverage insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim or placement among small percentage at field top.

A wrestler competing internationally sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed awards, membership, published material, and leading role criteria. The AAO found awards and membership met but rejected published material and leading role due to insufficient evidence and documentation, and concluded the aggregate record did not demonstrate sustained acclaim required for the classification.

A microbial ecologist filed I-140 for extraordinary ability. She met judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed to meet three total criteria. AAO found her citation metrics and journal participation insufficient to demonstrate major significance or sustained acclaim required for EB-1A classification.

An architect from Georgia sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in architecture and design. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding he satisfied no initial evidentiary criteria and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.

Guitarist met three initial criteria: judging, leading critical role, and commercial success. On final merits, AAO found petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim due to sixteen-year career gap from 2000 to 2016 without documented commercial success and insufficient evidence of renewed success since rejoining band.

Marketing and media relations consultant claims extraordinary ability in business. Meets only two of ten criteria. AAO finds awards belonged to employer not her, published material not about her, contributions limited to company impact, and displays not artistic exhibitions. Lacks sustained national acclaim; appeal dismissed.

Table tennis coach claimed six criteria. AAO dismissed appeal, finding no nationally recognized award for excellence, unsubstantiated association membership requirements, and articles about players rather than petitioner. Failure to meet three-criteria threshold precluded final merits review.

Jazz pianist claimed extraordinary ability through at least three initial evidentiary criteria. Director found two criteria met; petitioner claimed five on appeal. AAO affirmed only two criteria met (judging and exhibitions) and rejected others for insufficient evidence of national or international recognition, major media publication, or distinguished reputation. Appeal dismissed.

Pop artist claimed extraordinary ability, meeting published material and exhibitions criteria. On appeal claimed original contributions of major significance. AAO rejected original contributions finding that museum decisions to exhibit work and general praise letters lack specificity and probative evidence of field impact. Appeal dismissed.

Travel agency director claimed three criteria for extraordinary ability. The AAO found petitioner did not receive awards personally, published material was about the company not the individual, and the role was not leading or critical. Appeal dismissed.

Trek and mountain expedition leader claiming extraordinary ability. Met leading or critical role and published material criteria but only two of three required criteria. Awards lacked national or international recognition; rescue missions not shown to be major contributions. Appeal dismissed for insufficient initial criteria.