Published AAO appeal decisions

An entrepreneur sought EB-2 as advanced degree holder or exceptional ability person with national interest waiver. The AAO found no advanced degree, rejected exceptional ability (unmet criteria), and dismissed the NIW claim under Dhanasar because the first prong failed: his business income and employment gains did not establish substantial merit or national importance.

A petitioner claiming exceptional ability in the arts sought EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver. After a notice of intent to dismiss, she withdrew the appeal. The AAO granted the withdrawal and entered a finding of willful misrepresentation, based on falsely claimed authorship of two books using plagiarized material.

An administrative services specialist sought EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver but failed to qualify as advanced degree holder or person of exceptional ability. The AAO found her proposed work as executive assistant lacked national importance under Dhanasar's first prong, showing no substantial economic benefits, dismissing the appeal.

Self-petitioned entrepreneur in real estate investment and development sought national interest waiver under Dhanasar. Petitioner claimed proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance through economic growth and job creation. AAO found proposed work lacks national importance; expansion limited to petitioner's own companies without broader field or industry impact.

Self-petitioner artist seeking EB-2 exceptional ability and national interest waiver claimed exceptional ability in the arts and satisfaction of the Dhanasar framework. The petitioner withdrew the appeal after the AAO issued a notice of intent to dismiss based on willful misrepresentation of authorship of three books, a material fact affecting eligibility.

Self-petitioner entrepreneur seeking NIW on EB-2 petition. Claimed proposed business development and advisory work has national importance through job creation and economic benefit. AAO dismissed appeal, finding the specific endeavor lacks national importance under Dhanasar first prong, as work would not extend beyond petitioner's company and clients to impact the field broadly.

Entrepreneur seeks NIW and exceptional ability classification. AAO found he did not meet exceptional ability criteria and lacked evidence of national importance for proposed IT entrepreneurship work. Appeal dismissed because specific endeavor lacks substantial national importance.

A physical therapist sought EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional or exceptional ability individual, with a national interest waiver. The AAO held she met neither underlying classification because of insufficient qualifying experience and unchallenged findings on the regulatory criteria, so the waiver question was moot. The appeal was dismissed.

Collaborative pianist enrolled in doctoral program claims EB-1A extraordinary ability. Director found two criteria met; petitioner appealed claiming two additional criteria. AAO rejected both new claims. With only two criteria met, petitioner failed initial evidence requirement. Appeal dismissed.

An actress and model claimed six EB-1A criteria. The AAO found she met only the judging criterion and dismissed her appeal, concluding she failed to demonstrate extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim as required for this highly restrictive classification.

A songwriter and music producer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO affirmed the service center's denial, finding petitioner met only two of ten evidentiary criteria (high salary and commercial success). The proposed awards and critical role criteria failed; collectively insufficient evidence demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Software developer with overseas experience sought EB-2 with national interest waiver. AAO held he failed to meet three exceptional ability criteria and failed first and third Dhanasar prongs, dismissing the appeal.

A postdoctoral molecular and cellular biologist sought EB-1A classification. Prior appeal dismissed after finding only two of ten criteria met. Motion to reopen and reconsider was denied; AAO reaffirmed that petitioner satisfied only judging and scholarly articles criteria, did not meet original contributions and other criteria, and lacked sustained international acclaim necessary for extraordinary ability.

Sports journalist employed at major television networks initially claimed seven criteria. AAO found published material and high salary met but rejected original contributions, display, and critical role claims. Decision sustained dismissal based on lack of sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Medical scientist in dentistry with advanced degree sought NIW for dental services, clinical research, and clinic management. AAO dismissed appeal, finding proposed endeavor lacked national importance and detailed research plan, limiting impact to patients and students rather than the broader field.

Neuroscientist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal although petitioner met three evidentiary criteria. Final merits determination found no sustained national or international acclaim and failed to show petitioner ranked among the small percentage at the very top of the neuroscience field.

An anesthesiologist sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. Although qualified as advanced degree professional, the AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because petitioner failed to address the Director's findings on two dispositive Dhanasar prongs: national importance and balancing analysis, leaving these conclusions uncontested.

A mountaineering guide and expedition leader sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, claiming five criteria. AAO affirmed two criteria were met but rejected membership and declined to reach other criteria. Because petitioner satisfied only two of ten required criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim, appeal was dismissed.

A martial artist sought extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed a motion to reconsider, finding the petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three initial evidentiary criteria, satisfied none of the claimed criteria, and the motion merely restated prior arguments without showing legal error.

Administrative services manager claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. AAO dismissed motions to reopen and reconsider because petitioner failed to provide new evidence timely, did not demonstrate erroneous application of law, and did not establish any of the eight evidentiary criteria.

An operatic vocalist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding she satisfied only two of ten criteria and did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement in the top of her field.

A painter sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed membership, published material, original contributions, and scholarly articles criteria. The AAO found he satisfied only one initial criterion and failed to meet the required three. Appeal dismissed because the petitioner did not establish extraordinary ability through sustained national or international acclaim.

A robotics company CEO with a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering claimed extraordinary ability, meeting three evidentiary criteria. The AAO found the evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or achievement at the very top of the field.

Computer science associate professor claimed three evidentiary criteria. AAO affirmed two were met but rejected original contributions claim. With only two criteria established, petitioner failed the initial evidentiary requirement and could not proceed to final merits analysis.

A television and motion picture production professional claimed four additional criteria beyond the one met criterion. The AAO dismissed because she failed to satisfy three criteria and lacked evidence of sustained national acclaim or top-tier standing in film and television production.