Published AAO appeal decisions

Legal consultant seeking national interest waiver for EB-2 advanced degree classification. Petitioner claimed proposed work in cross-border commerce and trade consultation has national importance. AAO affirmed denial, finding work has substantial merit but lacks national importance because benefits would not extend beyond petitioner's company and clients to impact industry or economy broadly.

An international relations scholar and consultant had EB-1A approval revoked. The AAO dismissed his appeal, finding he satisfied only one of ten criteria and lacked required initial evidence or documented sustained acclaim for extraordinary ability in the field.

A journalist and patron of the arts sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification but failed to identify a single field encompassing her journalism, stage production, and arts organizing activities. The AAO rejected her claims under judging, leading or critical role, and membership criteria, finding insufficient or inconsistent evidence. The appeal was dismissed.

A lawyer sought NIW as EB-2 advanced degree professional, proposing to provide legal services. The AAO dismissed, finding her tax advice practice lacks national importance and her evidence of pro bono experience does not support her stated tax law endeavor. The first prong failed; remaining prongs were not addressed.

An attorney, mediator, journalist and author claimed extraordinary ability. The AAO found the petitioner satisfied only two of ten required criteria: judging and scholarly articles. Because three criteria are required, the appeal was dismissed without a final merits determination.

A social protection specialist sought NIW for EB-2 classification based on international development work in Egypt and Yemen. Petitioner claimed substantial merit and national importance of social protection initiatives, positioning to advance them, and that waiver benefits the US. AAO sustained appeal, finding all three Dhanasar prongs satisfied.

Minister in community development sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with national interest waiver. AAO dismissed appeal as abandoned for failure to respond to RFE. Alternatively, held petitioner failed to establish exceptional ability and did not meet any prong of the Dhanasar national interest waiver framework.

A policy analyst seeking EB-1A in sciences met three initial criteria (judging, original contributions, scholarly articles) and demonstrated extraordinary ability in final merits. The AAO sustained the appeal, finding the petitioner had sustained national acclaim at the very top of his field.

Lawyer and inmate behavioral modification specialist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Counsel failed to identify specific erroneous conclusions of law or fact on appeal. AAO summarily dismissed appeal under regulatory authority, finding counsel did not adequately explain evidence and petitioner failed to demonstrate intent to continue in claimed field of expertise.

Social worker and women's rights advocate claimed awards, membership, published material, and high salary criteria. The AAO rejected awards as decade-old and organizationally-based, membership as lacking outstanding achievement requirements, articles as incompletely translated, and salary as not clearly tied to social work. Evidence insufficient for sustained national or international acclaim.

Self-represented diplomat and physics instructor sought EB-1A classification claiming extraordinary ability. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to establish three regulatory criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of his field despite diplomatic achievements.

Diplomat and physicist self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability. AAO rejected reliance on ambassador rank as award, found published materials insufficient, and concluded contributions lacked major significance. Evidence showed talent but not achievements distinguishing petitioner at top of field.