Published AAO appeal decisions

An actor and model requested second preference classification as an individual of exceptional ability with a national interest waiver. The Director found no exceptional ability criteria met. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding her academic record, license, and membership evidence insufficient, and declined to analyze the waiver because the threshold was unmet.

Digital illustration artist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met three evidentiary criteria: published material, judging participation, and exhibition displays. However, on final merits review, AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim and placement among the very top of the field, dismissing the appeal.

Self-petitioner artist and former professor claiming extraordinary ability as painter. Met three evidentiary criteria: exhibitions, scholarly articles, and judging. AAO found the final merits step failed: evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the top of the field.

A contemporary Christian music producer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Though she met three initial criteria, the AAO dismissed because she failed the final merits test. Limited media coverage, one recent award, and amateur competition experience did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the field's top.

A senior exploration geologist met three initial criteria including scholarly articles, critical organizational roles, and high salary. However, in final merits determination, the AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or that the petitioner ranks among the very top of the field, dismissing the appeal despite initial threshold achievement.

A wrestling coach claimed extraordinary ability, meeting three evidentiary criteria. The AAO found the evidence lacked comparative data showing he ranks among the very top coaches and that his media coverage and achievements did not demonstrate the sustained acclaim required.

Architectural designer claimed three EB-1A criteria. Director found two met (awards, published material); petitioner appealed original contributions criterion. AAO dismissed: petitioner did not demonstrate original contributions of major significance or influence beyond individual projects. Final merits also failed; record showed successful career but not top-tier sustained acclaim.

Self-petitioner oncologist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met two criteria: judging and scholarly articles. AAO dismissed appeal, finding original contributions criterion not satisfied and insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim or top-tier recognition in medical field.

Endodontics professor sought EB-1A classification. Met three initial criteria via committee work, publications, and scholarly articles. AAO affirmed but rejected final merits, finding stale citation record, large editorial boards, and ad hoc local committee positions insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim. Appeal dismissed.

A CEO and business training center founder claimed seven criteria for extraordinary ability, satisfying three initially. The AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim, with media coverage local rather than national, dismissing the appeal.

Electrical engineer seeks NIW for EB-2 based on advanced degree. Petitioner proposed research on computer network frameworks. AAO found proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance under Dhanasar prong one. However, AAO held petitioner failed prong two: insufficient evidence demonstrated he was well positioned to advance the research despite Ph.D., publications, and citations. Appeal dismissed.

Dance competitor and instructor sought exceptional ability classification and national interest waiver. AAO dismissed, finding proposed endeavor lacks national importance because competitive participation and instruction would not impact the field broadly, offer substantial job creation, or provide meaningful economic effects.

Systems engineer and project manager with advanced degree sought national interest waiver for EB-2 by claiming endeavor to close diversity gaps in STEM through educational programs. AAO found proposed work lacked sufficient prospective impact beyond specific students to meet national importance standard and thus failed first Dhanasar prong.

Sales and marketing officer seeks NIW and exceptional ability classification. AAO found he does not qualify as advanced degree professional and lacks three exceptional ability criteria. Appeal dismissed because proposed marketing work lacks demonstrated national importance.

Physics doctoral candidate seeking NIW for hypersonic technology research. AAO affirmed denial, finding proposed endeavor has national importance but applicant not well positioned to advance it. Master's degree and publications alone insufficient; lacked demonstrated role securing funding or generating field impact.

Nurse practitioner sought NIW for EB-2. Petitioner claimed national importance based on occupation's overall value and COVID-19 pandemic, plus conference attendance and multilingual background. AAO dismissed, finding benefit to individual patients and local conference attendance insufficient to establish national importance; endeavor must have broader implications beyond current employment.

A singer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, claiming seven criteria. The AAO found three criteria met (awards, published material, judging), satisfying the threshold, but dismissed the appeal because the totality of evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

A graduate student in architecture sought an EB-2 exceptional ability classification with a national interest waiver. The AAO held that the salary and recognition criteria were unmet, since scholarships were not shown to be remuneration or significant recognition. Without three criteria, waiver analysis was not reached and the appeal was dismissed.

Dentist and entrepreneur seeks NIW for dental implantology research and treatment. AAO held proposed endeavor lacks national importance because it benefits only the petitioner's patients and employer without broader implications for U.S. workforce or economy, thus denying NIW eligibility.

A mechanical engineering professor from Nigeria claimed extraordinary ability through judging, scholarly articles, and critical roles. The AAO found he met three initial criteria but lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of his field.

Software developer seeks NIW for web system design and development. AAO held while software development has substantial merit, work lacks national importance because it benefits only employer and its users without broader impact on IT field or U.S. economy through job creation or economic effects.

A geriatric nurse with an advanced degree sought national interest waiver of labor certification. She qualified for EB-2 advanced degree status but failed to establish national importance: her patient care, manuals, and lectures lacked documentary evidence of broader impact beyond her individual patients and facility.

A weightlifter with exceptional ability seeks NIW for EB-2. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to provide specific proposed endeavor at filing; general intent to work in weightlifting lacks national importance and substantial merit as required.

Physical therapist with advanced degree sought national interest waiver for a proposed Florida clinic offering physical therapy and fall prevention services. The AAO found the endeavor lacks national importance under Dhanasar; local employment projections and unquantified cost savings insufficient to demonstrate broader implications.

A supply chain manager sought NIW for EB-2 classification. The AAO held the proposed endeavor lacks national importance: assertions about Brazilian market trade and general supply chain management benefits do not demonstrate impact beyond the employer, and vague speculation about innovations without evidence of broader adoption or comparable responsibility elsewhere is insufficient.