Published AAO appeal decisions

Chief financial officer sought EB-2 national interest waiver for credit recovery services business with machine learning technology. AAO affirmed SCOPS denial, finding petitioner failed national importance prong despite business plans. Unsupported employment projections and lack of evidence showing technology improvements or national economic significance precluded eligibility.

A software engineer and systems researcher sought an NIW for autonomous vehicle research. The AAO found substantial merit in the proposed endeavor but dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to demonstrate he was well positioned to advance it, lacking evidence of progress or external support.

An automotive service technician sought NIW for an exceptional ability business endeavor. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the proposed automotive repair venture lacked national importance despite its focus on important industry challenges; benefits were too localized to the petitioner's company.

A mathematician with a Ph.D. sought an EB-2 national interest waiver for mathematical research with government initiative alignment. The AAO agreed the proposed endeavor meets the first Dhanasar prong but found the petitioner is not well-positioned to advance it due to unclear employment status, unclear research duties, and insufficient evidence of available funding and institutional support.

Health services manager with advanced nursing degree seeking EB-2 classification and NIW for proposed healthcare business claimed national importance based on federal alignment, job creation projections, and revenue forecasts. AAO found proposed endeavor lacks national importance because benefits do not extend beyond individual patients to impact healthcare field broadly.

Ph.D. civil engineering student sought EB-2 with national interest waiver for railway safety and cybersecurity work. AAO dismissed, finding the proposed endeavor insufficiently defined through multiple inconsistent characterizations; petitioner's actual employment plans contradicted stated endeavor, preventing assessment of national importance.

Petitioner appealed dismissal of motion to reopen and reconsider prior NIW denial. AAO held appeal concerns only procedural motion dismissal not underlying petition denial; petitioner waived substantive arguments by not appealing original denial and failing to articulate legal error in motion dismissal.

Aerospace researcher claimed five evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. AAO found she met fewer than three criteria required and lacked sustained national or international acclaim at the top of her field, dismissing the appeal.

A site reliability engineer sought EB-1A classification. Four criteria were deemed waived, and the AAO withdrew the service center's favorable findings on judging and leading role, then rejected membership and original contributions. With fewer than three criteria met, the appeal was dismissed and final merits reserved.

A business executive planning a digital data analysis services company sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found the applicant failed to establish three of ten initial criteria. Membership claims lacked evidence that the associations required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts. The appeal was dismissed without reaching final merits.

An environmental science professor and researcher specializing in soil conservation and AI-powered monitoring systems sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner met only two criteria (judging and scholarly articles) and failed to establish the required three; final merits determination also failed.

An EB-2 applicant seeking national interest waiver filed a third motion to reconsider after prior dismissals. The AAO dismissed the motion because petitioner merely disagreed with conclusions without identifying legal or policy errors as required for reconsideration. Underlying petition remained denied.

A philosophy researcher claimed seven extraordinary ability criteria; SCOPS found four met. AAO, in final merits determination, dismissed the appeal, concluding the totality of evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that petitioner is among the very top of the field despite meeting initial criteria.

Energy policy analyst with master's degree sought EB-2 with national interest waiver to research energy policy reforms. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish the proposed endeavor has national importance, lacking concrete evidence of economic impact, employment creation, or differentiated methodology from existing research.

Street dancer and cultural advocate sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification for education and advocacy work. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to meet initial evidence requirement of three regulatory criteria. Awards were for competitive dancing not education; association membership inadequately documented; sustained national acclaim not established.

An accountant claimed extraordinary ability in business. Although service center found three criteria met, AAO affirmed denial because evidence of publications, editorial work, and awards clustered shortly before filing in 2025, failing to show sustained national or international acclaim required.

Computer engineer with master's degree seeks NIW for research in advanced computational models, brain-machine interfaces, and smart sensors. AAO found proposed endeavor has substantial merit but lacks demonstrated national importance or evidence of impact on healthcare, neurotechnology, agriculture, or public health fields.

A self-petitioner proposes directing volleyball and soccer classes for low-income children. AAO affirmed service center revocation, finding proposed endeavor lacks national importance; offering youth sports to specific populations does not extend broader implications to industry, region, or nation required by Dhanasar.

A short-form content creator with large social media presence claimed extraordinary ability but satisfied only two evidentiary criteria (published material and critical role). On appeal, the AAO rejected the awards criterion due to insufficient documentation of selection criteria and merit-based recognition. With fewer than three criteria met, the AAO declined to reach final merits and dismissed.

A synthetic organic chemist met at least three initial EB-1A criteria but failed the final merits step. AAO found his judging experience and publications insufficient to show he rose to the very top of the field or enjoyed sustained national or international acclaim.

A postdoctoral neuroscience researcher seeking national interest waiver for EB-2 advanced degree petition demonstrated the first Dhanasar prong: substantial merit and national importance of her proposed research. However, she failed the second prong because her academic accomplishments, citations, and letters of support were insufficient to show she is well positioned to advance the endeavor. Appeal dismissed.

Information security associate vice president claimed seven criteria and satisfied three: judging, leading role, and high salary. AAO held initial evidence requirements met but final merits analysis showed insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim or placement among small percentage at top of field.

A dancer, choreographer, and coach met only two initial criteria and failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim. AAO withdrew the service center's award finding and affirmed the final merits determination, dismissing the appeal.

CEO with advanced degree sought EB-2 national interest waiver for electronics export business. AAO dismissed motions to reopen and reconsider, finding petitioner failed to establish national importance of the proposed endeavor. Motion evidence showed decreased business income and insufficient economic impact.

A business executive in the pomegranate industry filed motions to reopen and reconsider an EB-1A extraordinary ability appeal. The AAO dismissed both motions, finding no new facts warranting reopening and no incorrect application of law or policy in the prior dismissal.