Published AAO appeal decisions

CEO and entrepreneur sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification and NIW. Director denied both. AAO affirmed, finding petitioner did not qualify for underlying EB-2 as advanced degree professional or exceptional ability due to insufficient academic documentation, lack of progressive work experience, and deficient evidentiary support, rendering NIW analysis unnecessary.

An entrepreneur with fifteen years of business experience in strategy, development, and international trade sought EB-2 NIW classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner's proposed work expanding existing businesses lacked national importance under Dhanasar's first prong; no evidence of substantial economic impact beyond his companies.

General operations manager sought national interest waiver for EB-2 advanced degree classification. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner's proposed consulting company endeavor lacked national importance under Dhanasar; business served only direct employer and clients, not broader U.S. economic effects or job creation.

Regional sales manager seeks NIW for continued sales management work improving team performance and cross-border transactions. AAO dismissed appeal, finding endeavor lacks national importance; proposed work shows no particular process improvement, and benefits would be limited to employer and clients.

Business executive and company founder in China claimed six evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. AAO found one criterion met but concluded petitioner failed to satisfy the three-criterion threshold and lacks sustained national or international acclaim required for EB-1A classification.

Self-petitioner and business owner in logistics and supply chain management. Established advanced degree eligibility but sought national interest waiver. AAO dismissed, finding proposed business endeavor, though meritorious, lacks national importance as required by first Dhanasar prong; no broader field or substantial economic impact demonstrated.

Media management expert sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed judging, leading role, salary, and original contributions criteria. AAO found only judging criterion met; one criterion insufficient. Record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Business manager with advanced degree sought national interest waiver for EB-2 claiming endeavor to improve U.S. business structures and profitability. AAO found he was well positioned to advance but proposed endeavor lacked sufficient national importance specificity, failing first Dhanasar prong and rendering waiver ineligible.

A nonprofit executive sought EB-2 exceptional ability and national interest waiver. The AAO affirmed that he did not meet exceptional ability criteria. On NIW review under Dhanasar, the decision found the first prong failed because his proposed nonprofit management work lacked sufficient detail to demonstrate national importance beyond organizational level activities.

A businessperson sought extraordinary ability classification claiming membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements. The AAO found willful misrepresentation of material facts regarding association memberships through altered translations and falsified documents, dismissed the appeal on withdrawal, and entered a separate finding of material misrepresentation affecting future admissibility.

A business executive in the energy industry sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming to rank among top corporate executives worldwide. The Director found only the leading or critical role criterion met. The AAO dismissed the appeal because membership and published material were not established and the record lacked sustained acclaim at the top of the field.

Development director self-petitioned for EB-1A visa. Applicant met three evidentiary criteria but appeal dismissed on final merits. Motions to reopen and reconsider dismissed because petitioner submitted no new facts or evidence and failed to show AAO misapplied law or policy.

An administrative services specialist sought EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver but failed to qualify as advanced degree holder or person of exceptional ability. The AAO found her proposed work as executive assistant lacked national importance under Dhanasar's first prong, showing no substantial economic benefits, dismissing the appeal.

Administrative services manager claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. AAO dismissed motions to reopen and reconsider because petitioner failed to provide new evidence timely, did not demonstrate erroneous application of law, and did not establish any of the eight evidentiary criteria.

A consultant claimed extraordinary ability based on original contributions, leading role, and high salary. The AAO found only the leading role criterion met, fell short of the three-criterion minimum, and dismissed the appeal without reaching final merits analysis.

General and operations manager sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification and NIW. AAO affirmed denial because petitioner failed to satisfy three of six exceptional ability regulatory criteria; NIW arguments not reached as dispositive basis for denial was established.

An operations representative claiming international expertise in security, risk analysis, and related fields sought national interest waiver for EB-2. The AAO dismissed because he did not qualify as an advanced degree professional or individual of exceptional ability; he did not meet three of six regulatory criteria for exceptional ability.

Emergency management specialist sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification and national interest waiver. Petitioner claimed four criteria but failed to meet three required. AAO found proposed work lacked national importance under Dhanasar, dismissing appeal without analyzing remaining NIW prongs.

Business development specialist self-petitioner claimed four criteria and extraordinary ability. AAO upheld finding of three criteria met but determined overall evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

A CEO and business training center founder claimed seven criteria for extraordinary ability, satisfying three initially. The AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim, with media coverage local rather than national, dismissing the appeal.

Systems engineer and project manager with advanced degree sought national interest waiver for EB-2 by claiming endeavor to close diversity gaps in STEM through educational programs. AAO found proposed work lacked sufficient prospective impact beyond specific students to meet national importance standard and thus failed first Dhanasar prong.

A supply chain manager sought NIW for EB-2 classification. The AAO held the proposed endeavor lacks national importance: assertions about Brazilian market trade and general supply chain management benefits do not demonstrate impact beyond the employer, and vague speculation about innovations without evidence of broader adoption or comparable responsibility elsewhere is insufficient.

Marketing manager with advanced degree sought NIW for EB-2. Petitioner proposed providing marketing and business development services for Brazil-U.S. market connections. AAO found proposed endeavor lacked national importance and specific prospective impact, and declined to address remaining Dhanasar prongs.

A security advisor seeks NIW for EB-2 claiming a security management and counterterrorism role of national importance. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner did not sufficiently demonstrate that the specific proposed endeavor has national importance beyond general field significance; evidence of prospective impact was insufficient.

Business consultant with 25 years experience in Brazilian market entry seeks NIW for consultancy services to North American firms. AAO dismissed appeal, finding endeavor has substantial merit but lacks national importance; proposed work impacts individual clients only, not the field broadly.