Published AAO appeal decisions

An entrepreneur in STEM education filed a motion to reconsider an NIW denial for an EB-2 national interest waiver for a coding academy. The AAO affirmed the prior decision that the petitioner failed the first Dhanasar prong: the proposed academy lacked independent corroboration of national importance and would not impact the field beyond local scope.

Computer systems analyst claims extraordinary ability in sciences. Met at least three initial evidentiary criteria including leading role, membership, and salary. AAO found evidence lacks sustained acclaim over long period and achievements not recognized in field through extensive documentation. Appeal dismissed.

Data security and compliance professional with exceptional ability sought NIW for consultancy serving small and medium enterprises and educational institutions. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to establish national importance; evidence lacked sufficient detail showing the specific company's endeavor would achieve substantial positive economic effects at national scale.

Cybersecurity professional with Master's degree sought EB-2 national interest waiver without job offer. AAO affirmed denial, finding the proposed endeavor lacked national importance despite claimed expertise in enterprise platforms. Unsupported assertions about billion-dollar transactions and strategic alignment insufficient without corroborating evidence of specific prospective impact.

A research scientist with a master's degree in electrical and computer engineering sought an NIW for EB-2 classification. The AAO found the proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance but dismissed because the petitioner lacked a concrete plan and employment pursuit evidence to demonstrate he was well-positioned to advance it.

An IT systems engineer seeking EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver filed a self-petition. The AAO found the beneficiary qualified for EB-2 as an advanced degree professional but failed to establish national importance of his proposed endeavor. The vague business plan lacked evidence of significant employment creation or economic benefits at regional or national levels.

A digital health communications influencer and public health educator sought EB-1A classification. The service center found two criteria met; the AAO on appeal reconsidered and found insufficient evidence for the high salary criterion, leaving petitioner below the three-criterion threshold.

An AI researcher with a Ph.D. in theoretical physics sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She met initial evidence requirements in three criteria but failed the original contributions prong on closer review; citations alone were insufficient proof of major significance. The AAO found the record lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for the visa.

A digital transformation architect satisfied three initial criteria but failed the final merits test. AAO found his Salesforce certification, recent judging, publications, and employment did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or placement among the very top of the field required for extraordinary ability.

Software development engineer in test claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A, citing five criteria. AAO found he met judging and high salary criteria but abandoned other claims on appeal. Two criteria insufficient; record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Research engineer seeks NIW under EB-2 to conduct research in vehicle safety, renewable energy, and data centers. AAO dismissed, finding substantial merit but insufficient evidence of national importance; research activities limited to employer and clients without demonstrated broader implications.

Founder and CEO of an AI platform company sought EB-1A classification. Petitioner claimed seven evidentiary criteria and sustained acclaim. AAO affirmed SCOPS finding that only judging criterion was met. Venture capital funding, fellowship participation, and other claims failed because they lacked necessary recognition or expert evaluation. Appeal dismissed.

Computer science PhD studying efficient AI model deployment met first Dhanasar prong on substantial merit and national importance. However, AAO found insufficient evidence of being well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor through citations, letters, and research record. Third prong not reached. Appeal dismissed.

A founder and CEO of an AI auditing platform startup seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed six criteria; SCOPS found two met. AAO withdrew and remanded, finding the leading/critical role criterion additionally satisfied, but remanded for final merits determination on whether the evidence shows sustained national or international acclaim and place among the very top.

A technical program manager claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A, meeting two of ten criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding insufficient evidence of extraordinary ability. Petitioner satisfied judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed to demonstrate that his original contributions had major significance or that he had national or international acclaim.

Computer scientist with master's degree in electrical engineering sought EB-2 NIW for individual research optimizing spectrum sensing in wireless networks. AAO found endeavor has substantial merit but lacks national importance. Petitioner failed to show individual research would impact field on scale commensurate with national importance despite field relevance.

Technology entrepreneur and CEO claims extraordinary ability in AI systems and industrial devices. Petitioner satisfied two criteria (scholarly articles, critical role) but failed to meet three required criteria. Awards claim unsupported; venture capital not a recognized prize. Membership requirements lack outstanding achievement standard. Appeal dismissed.

An information systems researcher self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Although three initial criteria were satisfied, the applicant failed to establish sufficient additional criteria or sustained national or international acclaim. The AAO found original contributions lacked major significance, published materials came from non-major outlets, and comparative salary evidence was absent.

Computational fluid dynamics researcher with advanced degree sought national interest waiver as EB-2. Petitioner proposed research on thermal management systems. AAO dismissed appeal, finding inadequate evidence of research success, sustained government funding interest, or detailed plan for advancing proposed endeavor.

A systems engineer sought NIW to design cybersecurity frameworks for U.S. energy and oil-gas infrastructure. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the proposed endeavor scope too broadly defined and implausible, and that general cybersecurity importance did not establish the specific endeavor's national importance.

Self-petitioner seeking to establish an IT security consulting firm in Florida claims national interest waiver. Petitioner demonstrated substantial merit of cybersecurity work but failed to show national importance; individual company services lack broader implications extending beyond clients to impact field, region, or nation at requisite level.

AI solutions architect claimed seven extraordinary ability criteria. AAO found petitioner met three required criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and leading role. The case was remanded to SCOPS for final merits determination on whether the totality of evidence establishes extraordinary ability.

A cybersecurity engineer claiming extraordinary ability in EB-1A satisfied four of seven claimed criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding that while regulatory criteria were met, the totality of evidence failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and placement among the very top in the field.

An IT specialist in cloud computing and cybersecurity sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed seven criteria; the Service Center found four met. On appeal, the AAO rejected awards and memberships as unmet and concluded the petitioner failed to satisfy the three-criterion threshold, so final merits was not addressed. Appeal dismissed.