Published AAO appeal decisions

Violist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in the arts. AAO found she satisfied only one of ten required criteria, lacking sufficient evidence of national or international recognition, critical roles, or commercial success to demonstrate sustained acclaim and top-tier status.

Physician and neonatal researcher sought NIW for research on premature infant conditions. AAO found research met national importance prong but petitioner failed second prong: no demonstrated record of success or field impact through citations or clinical practice changes. Appeal dismissed.

CEO and founder of consumer electronics company sought NIW under Dhanasar framework. AAO found his entrepreneurial endeavor had substantial merit and he was well positioned to advance it, but insufficient evidence demonstrated national importance. Appeal dismissed because first prong unmet.

Aerospace engineer with advanced degrees in mathematics and engineering sought NIW. AAO found both proposed engineering and STEM teaching endeavors lacked national importance and he lacked sufficient record demonstrating he was well positioned to advance them. Appeal dismissed.

Actor and acting coach seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability claimed six criteria but met only exhibitions. Awards lacked proof of recognition, memberships lacked expert judgment, published material uncorroborated, judging informal only, salary unsubstantiated, and commercial success lacked sales data. Appeal dismissed.

A medical business strategist recent graduate claimed five criteria. Awards were school-based and unrelated to claimed field; published articles were not about her; membership lacked required achievement standards; internship role lacked documented distinguished institution status. AAO found zero of three required criteria met and dismissed.

Public administration professor and development institute director in Korea sought EB-2 national interest waiver. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to identify specific proposed endeavor with sufficient clarity and did not establish substantial merit, national importance, or that waiver would benefit the United States.

Lawyer-engineer claimed extraordinary ability in engineering and intellectual property. Met three initial criteria but AAO found lack of sustained national or international acclaim. Evidence predominantly from 1999-2004 with no recent accomplishments; awards lacked national or international recognition despite professional activity.

Sitting volleyball coach claimed extraordinary ability in athletics based on 1990 gold medal and multiple criteria. Met one criterion (lesser award) but failed to meet requirement of three criteria. AAO found record did not support level of expertise for extraordinary ability classification in sports.

Internal medicine physician claimed extraordinary ability in sciences. Met two criteria (judging and scholarly articles) but failed to meet three-criterion threshold. Original contributions lacked major significance; leading role not demonstrated at distinguished organization. Aggregate review found insufficient expertise.

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.

A forensic DNA analyst sought NIW as EB-2 advanced degree professional, proposing to continue laboratory work analyzing DNA evidence. The AAO dismissed, finding substantial merit but lacking national importance since her laboratory work does not demonstrate impact beyond her employer or broader contributions to forensic science advancement.

A representational painter sought EB-1A classification. The AAO found she met only two criteria: published material and display of artwork in exhibitions. Her claim for original contributions was rejected because favorable reviews and sales do not demonstrate field-wide impact. Appeal dismissed.

A staff physician claimed extraordinary ability in medicine under EB-1A. The AAO found he met only two criteria: judging and scholarly articles. His claims for membership, original contributions, and critical role were rejected as insufficient. Appeals dismissed because three criteria required.

Spanish language teacher and specialist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability in education. Petitioner claimed six criteria but provided insufficient documentation for each. Director found only two criteria met; petitioner failed to meet the required three. AAO affirmed dismissal, finding no extraordinary ability demonstrated.

Operetta performer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in arts. Petitioner met three initial evidentiary criteria (judging, exhibitions, published material) but failed final merits determination. AAO found petitioner talented but not demonstrating sustained acclaim or top-tier status required for extraordinary ability.

BIM specialist in sustainable architecture design sought EB-2 national interest waiver. Petitioner qualified for advanced-degree classification but failed to respond to RFE requesting evidence under three-part Dhanasar framework. Appeal dismissed as abandoned and on merits for insufficient national importance.

Mathematics professor claimed extraordinary ability in education and sought EB-1A classification. Petitioner met one of ten required criteria (scholarly articles) but did not satisfy awards, original contributions, critical role, or salary requirements. AAO dismissed appeal for failure to meet minimum three-criterion threshold.

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 director sought extraordinary ability classification in art. The service center denied the petition. On appeal the petitioner stated a brief would follow but filed nothing and identified no erroneous conclusion. The appeal was summarily dismissed for that failure, so no criteria were analyzed.

Research and development engineer sought EB-2 national interest waiver. Petitioner established advanced degree and was well positioned to advance proposed engineering and software work. However, failed to demonstrate prospective impact beyond company clients sufficient for national importance. Appeal dismissed.

A representational painter conducting collaborative shows sought EB-1A classification in the arts. The petitioner met only two of three required criteria: published material and exhibitions. Original contributions claim failed because sales and local gallery success do not demonstrate impact on the field as a whole. Petitioner also failed to show intent to continue work in visual arts. Appeal dismissed.

Film director and screenwriter appealed EB-1A denial. Met only one of ten criteria (judging). AAO reversed director's favorable finding on awards and rejected claims of published material, original contributions, and high salary due to insufficient documentation and specificity.

An Indian classical dancer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO held petitioner met only one of ten required criteria (exhibitions) and failed to establish three-criterion threshold, finding no one-time major award or aggregate evidence of extraordinary ability and sustained national or international acclaim.

A supply chain analyst with advanced degrees sought EB-2 national interest waiver for statistical analysis and traffic route optimization work. AAO held the proposed endeavor lacked sufficient national importance as impact was limited to the petitioner's company, not the field broadly, failing the first Dhanasar prong.