Published AAO appeal decisions

A self-petitioner sought an EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver, and the service center denied it. The AAO dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds, finding the signature on the appeal form was an image copied from other documents rather than an original handwritten signature. The merits of the waiver were not decided.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Appeal dismissed on procedural grounds: Form I-290B and Form G-28 lacked valid original signatures as required by regulation, and foreign language documents relied on blanket translation certificate that did not identify specific documents.

A certified flight instructor and pilot with a Master's degree in Aeronautics sought a national interest waiver to work as a designated pilot examiner. The AAO affirmed denial, finding the proposed endeavor has substantial merit but lacks national importance; it benefits individual trainees but lacks broader field or sector impact required by Dhanasar.

A pilot seeks EB-2 national interest waiver. The AAO dismissed a prior appeal finding no national importance. The motion to reopen, based on filing a subsequent petition, provides no new material facts established at the time of the original filing, so the motion is dismissed.

A self-petitioner sought a national interest waiver of the job offer requirement. The service center found he qualified for the underlying classification but denied the waiver. On appeal, the AAO dismissed because the signatures on the appeal form and the representation form appeared electronically copied and not valid original handwritten signatures. The merits were not reached.

An operations/technical specialist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. SCOPS contradicted itself, first stating three criteria were met then denying them without analysis. AAO remanded, finding the decision lacked sufficient explanation and analysis required for meaningful appellate review.

Advanced degree professional sought NIW for EB-2 as commercial pilot, flight instructor, and consultant. AAO found substantial merit but rejected national importance prong, concluding proposed endeavor lacks sufficient breadth or impact to benefit national economy as required by Dhanasar framework. Appeal dismissed.

An extraordinary ability petitioner, whose occupation is not stated, filed a second combined motion to reopen and reconsider after denial and earlier dismissals. The AAO dismissed it because no new facts were supported by documents and no incorrect application of law or policy was shown; the arguments merely repeated earlier ones.

A self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, and the service center denied the petition. The appeal was dismissed on procedural grounds because the notice of appeal carried a script-font signature rather than the petitioner's personal signature, so the substantive criteria were never examined.

Airline pilot sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claiming published material, original contributions, and critical role. AAO affirmed denial, finding no major award and failing to meet three regulatory criteria. Petitioner's safety innovations and comparable evidence claims rejected as insufficient.

Commercial pilot from Panama sought NIW for EB-2. AAO held petitioner failed to establish exceptional ability: only two criteria met (degree and license), not three required. Insufficient evidence of ten years experience, exceptional salary, professional association membership, or industry recognition. Underlying visa eligibility denied; NIW not analyzed.

A geologist sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with a national interest waiver. After an earlier appeal and several motions were dismissed, the petitioner filed a combined motion to reopen and reconsider. The AAO dismissed both: the delay in the prior late motion was not shown reasonable or beyond his control, and no legal error was identified.

A self-petitioner seeking extraordinary ability classification had the petition denied, then lost an appeal and five motions. This sixth combined motion to reopen and reconsider was dismissed. The AAO found no new facts, no legal or policy error, and no basis to excuse the earlier untimely filing, which was within the petitioner's control.

An airplane pilot sought EB-2 national interest waiver for a proposed aviation training business in Florida. AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner failed to demonstrate national importance. The business plan lacked specifics on wages, worker numbers, location, and how the endeavor would have broader implications beyond the aviation industry.

Commercial pilot and flight instructor seeks EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. Petitioner failed to establish foreign equivalent to U.S. advanced degree; diploma was three-year credential equivalent to only U.S. bachelor's degree. Intended occupation does not meet profession requirement; petition dismissed.

A petitioner claiming exceptional ability for an EB-2 national interest waiver filed successive motions to reopen and reconsider after initial denials. The AAO dismissed the second motion, finding the petitioner had been given notice of required evidence and a reasonable opportunity to submit it, and that no new facts or legal errors warranted reconsideration.

A self-petitioning professional with an advanced degree sought a national interest waiver. After earlier denial and several dismissed appeals and motions, a fourth combined motion to reopen and reconsider claimed ineffective assistance of prior counsel. The AAO dismissed it because no prejudice or substantial compliance with the required procedure was shown, and the arguments were repeated.

An individual seeking extraordinary ability classification had a petition denied and an earlier appeal dismissed. Combined motions to reopen and reconsider were filed after the 33-day deadline, and the delay was not shown to be reasonable and beyond the petitioner's control. The AAO dismissed both motions as untimely and for lacking new facts or legal error.

A self-petitioner sought extraordinary ability classification, and the appeal was previously summarily dismissed along with earlier motions. On a second combined motion, the AAO dismissed both the motion to reopen and the motion to reconsider because no new facts, brief, evidence, or legal error were shown. No criteria were decided.

An airline pilot sought EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver to work as a pilot and ground instructor. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish that his proposed endeavor addressing pilot shortage had substantial merit or national importance; support letters remained too vague about prospective impact.

A pilot and aviation consultant sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed three criteria but failed to establish any. Pilot certification is not association membership; employer companies lack documented distinguished reputation; salary evidence compared pilots not consultants. AAO dismissed, finding insufficient initial evidence.

A motorcycle mechanic and instructor sought an EB-2 national interest waiver for his own business. The AAO dismissed the appeal after finding he did not meet the underlying EB-2 exceptional ability requirement; therefore it did not reach the Dhanasar waiver prongs.

Petitioner seeks NIW as advanced degree professional. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to establish five years progressive post-baccalaureate experience in specialty as required for underlying EB-2 classification; NIW eligibility not reached.

A commercial airline pilot and captain with advanced qualifications proposed pilot and flight instructor work and aviation safety consultancy. The AAO held his expertise and prior success, while relevant to positioning under the second prong, do not establish national importance of the specific proposed endeavor, which lacks demonstrated broader implications for the aviation industry.