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
275 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- EB-2 NIWFinance and economicsJun 2021Dismissed
An accountant with advanced degree sought national interest waiver for EB-2 classification. The petitioner claimed his tax planning and accounting work would have national importance. The AAO found the proposed endeavor had substantial merit but lacked national importance because benefits would not extend beyond his employer and clients or impact the accounting industry broadly.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-2 NIWFinance and economicsJun 2021Dismissed
Chief financial officer sought NIW as EB-2 member of professions with advanced degree. Petitioner proposed general CFO work to improve company financial health but did not specify employer or demonstrate how work would impact US financial sector broadly. AAO affirmed denial, finding no established national importance of the specific endeavor.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-2 NIWFinance and economicsJun 2021Dismissed
Financial manager with advanced degree seeks national interest waiver for EB-2. AAO held waiver claim fails at first prong: proposed financial manager work lacks sufficient national importance because it lacks documented prospective impact beyond specific employers or broader economic effects commensurate with national significance.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-2 NIWFinance and economicsJun 2021Dismissed
International tax advisor petitioner sought national interest waiver. AAO found petitioner qualified for advanced degree classification but dismissed appeal, concluding proposed tax advisory services lacked national importance under Dhanasar's first prong; work limited to private clients without broader economic or field impact.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-2 NIWFinance and economicsApr 2021Dismissed
A financial manager with an advanced degree sought a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement, proposing to advise businesses on investment strategies and train staff. The AAO held the endeavor lacked demonstrated national importance, since the industry's importance is not the test and economic impact went unsupported. Remaining prongs were not reached.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-2 NIWFinance and economicsApr 2021Dismissed
Accountant sought EB-2 with national interest waiver based on proposed accounting and tax consulting work. Director and AAO found substantial merit but rejected national importance, finding no sufficient evidence of broad economic impact beyond employer and clients. Appeal dismissed.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-2 NIWFinance and economics2021Dismissed
Financial manager sought NIW as EB-2 member of professions with advanced degree. Petitioner proposed work advising on financial investments and capital allocation. AAO affirmed denial, finding insufficient evidence that proposed endeavor would impact the financial field or nation's economy broadly or create substantial US employment.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-2 NIWFinance and economics2021Dismissed
A financial manager seeks NIW under EB-2. He claimed his proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance. The AAO found substantial merit but not national importance because his work would not extend beyond his employer to impact the financial services field more broadly.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-2 NIWFinance and economicsDec 2020Dismissed
Finance manager sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. Service center found advanced degree qualification but denied waiver. Petitioner asserted national importance through financial management benefits and community financial literacy. AAO held proposed work lacked national importance under Dhanasar first prong and dismissed appeal.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economicsNov 2020Dismissed
A finance business partner claimed four additional criteria beyond two already met by the service center. The AAO agreed she met judging and critical role criteria but rejected membership claims. With only two criteria met instead of three required, the petition failed. Appeal dismissed.
2 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-2 NIWFinance and economicsMay 2020Dismissed
Financial applications consultant with advanced degree seeks NIW under Dhanasar framework. Claimed proposed financial consulting work has national importance with federal government impact. AAO found petitioner failed first prong: proposed work lacks demonstrated national importance, specific projects, or substantial U.S. economic effects beyond employer and clients.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economicsApr 2020Dismissed
Executive accountant and founder claimed extraordinary ability through judging, publications, and critical role. AAO agreed three criteria met, triggering final merits analysis. However, found sporadic publication record and limited auditing history insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim and top tier standing in accounting field.
3 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economicsMar 2020Dismissed
A venture capital firm managing partner claimed five EB-1A criteria. The AAO affirmed the director's finding that the petitioner met none of them, finding articles not in major media, contributions not of major significance, and scholarship not established. The decision declined final merits review.
0 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-2 NIWFinance and economics2020Dismissed
Financial analyst petitioner sought national interest waiver. AAO found petitioner qualified for advanced degree classification but dismissed appeal, concluding proposed work lacked national importance under Dhanasar's first prong; services benefited employer and clients only without sufficient evidence of broader economic effects or job creation.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2018Dismissed
A real estate analyst and researcher met judging and scholarly articles criteria. AAO rejected original contributions of major significance, finding petitioner's influence confined to China rather than broader field impact. With only two criteria met, appeal dismissed for insufficient evidence of top-tier extraordinary ability.
2 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2016Sustained
Financial journalist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met at least three criteria including awards, judging/leading roles, and published material. AAO sustained appeal, finding record demonstrated sustained national acclaim and expertise indicating top small percentage in journalism field.
5 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2016Dismissed
An options market consultant and educator self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability. The AAO found the petitioner met none of the analyzed regulatory criteria and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement at the top of the field. Appeal dismissed.
0 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2015Dismissed
A wine expert and enologist self-petitioner sought extraordinary ability classification. The director revoked approval, finding the petitioner did not meet any regulatory criteria and willfully misrepresented material facts regarding awards, article authorship, and salary. The AAO sustained dismissal and affirmed willful misrepresentation finding.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2011Dismissed
Accounting auditor petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed at least two criteria. AAO affirmed director's finding that single employer award lacked national or international recognition and failed to meet plural requirement; final merits analysis showed petitioner did not achieve sustained acclaim or top-tier status in field.
0 of 2 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2011Dismissed
A commodities trader claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. The AAO found the petitioner failed to meet three required evidentiary criteria and, even if one issue were resolved on appeal, the overall evidence does not demonstrate sustained acclaim at the very top of the field.
0 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2009Dismissed
A self-petitioner in financial investment sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed multiple criteria but provided insufficient evidence. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field, and evidence was dated nearly a decade before filing.
0 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2009Dismissed
Economist and educator claiming extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Petitioner submitted evidence of award, organization membership, judging invitations, original contributions, and scholarly articles. AAO found award lacked recognition, membership non-exclusive, judging insufficient, contributions not of major significance, and articles improperly translated. Appeal dismissed.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2005Dismissed
A financial investment advisor self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in business. The AAO found only one criterion met and dismissed the appeal, concluding the petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level of the field.
1 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2005Dismissed
Investment researcher in business field claimed extraordinary ability through three criteria. AAO found membership, judging, and original contributions claims unsubstantiated. Decision held petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained acclaim necessary for EB-1A classification.
0 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economics2005Dismissed
Investment researcher in business field claimed extraordinary ability through three criteria. AAO found membership, judging, and original contributions claims unsubstantiated. Decision held petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained acclaim necessary for EB-1A classification.
0 of 4 criteria metRead →
