Published AAO appeal decisions

Pathologist and professor seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met three of ten criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and critical role at family company. AAO dismissed appeal, finding no sustained national or international acclaim; achievements were routine academic duties and family-based rather than demonstrating top-tier standing.

Tattoo artist and painter claimed seven criteria; Director found three threshold criteria met. AAO sustained appeal, finding at final merits that petitioner achieved sustained national or international acclaim through substantial media presence, large social media following, and documented professional recognition as widely respected artist.

A self-petitioner general operations manager sought NIW classification and waiver as an advanced degree professional or individual of exceptional ability. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding she failed to establish underlying EB-2 eligibility because her foreign education equivalency and exceptional ability were not sufficiently demonstrated.

An oil and gas industry executive sought extraordinary ability classification. The service center found the initial criteria met but denied on final merits. The AAO sustained the appeal, finding additional criteria satisfied and concluding that the whole record showed sustained acclaim and top-of-field standing, which the director had overlooked.

Wedding photographer from South Africa claiming seven evidentiary criteria for EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO agreed with Director that only two criteria met: judging and exhibitions. Published material, awards, and membership claims failed. Record shows successful photographer with prominent clients but does not establish sustained acclaim required for top of field.

Entrepreneur claiming exceptional ability and national interest waiver presented inconsistent evidence about occupational field and job duties. AAO held petitioner failed to establish consistent occupational definition, met only one of six exceptional ability criteria, and thus lacked EB-2 eligibility, making waiver analysis unnecessary.

Brazilian jiu-jitsu athlete and coach claiming extraordinary ability. Petitioner claimed five criteria but established only two: awards and judging. On appeal, sought to add membership and leading role criteria but failed to meet either. AAO dismissed appeal because the petitioner satisfied fewer than the required three criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.

A visual effects artist and animator sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification after remand. The AAO affirmed that the petitioner satisfied only two of three required criteria (display and high salary). The record did not demonstrate the sustained national/international acclaim or position among the small percentage at the top of the field required for extraordinary ability.

Performer from Russian national athletic team seeking extraordinary ability classification. Meets three evidentiary criteria but fails final merits analysis. Though petitioner had sustained international acclaim as athlete through 2014, he failed to demonstrate sustained acclaim as performer; earnings and lack of public distinction do not reflect extraordinary ability.

Director and producer sought EB-2 with national interest waiver. Petitioner did not establish five years of post-baccalaureate experience required for advanced degree professional classification due to inconsistent employment documentation and lack of proper employer letters. AAO dismissed appeal.

Architect sought NIW for EB-2 advanced degree classification for proposed architectural and design projects. AAO held petitioner failed to establish specific consistent proposed endeavor and did not demonstrate national importance beyond general field significance, thus failing Dhanasar first prong.

Individual initially claimed entrepreneur status via luxury car service; later asserted agriculture field. AAO found occupational field description inconsistent and insufficient; could not determine exceptional ability level. Failed to meet EB-2 threshold; NIW analysis declined as issue dispositive.

Drill operator sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification and NIW. AAO affirmed denial because petitioner failed to satisfy three of six exceptional ability criteria under 8 C.F.R. § 204.5(k)(3)(ii); decision reserved opinion on Dhanasar NIW analysis.

A television host sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming seven criteria on appeal. The Director had accepted only judging. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding awards, published material and original contributions unproven, leaving the petitioner short of three criteria, and noting that sustained acclaim and top-of-field standing were not shown.

A financial executive sought a national interest waiver for an EB-2 petition. Although the director found the petitioner qualified as advanced degree professional and the endeavor had substantial merit, the AAO affirmed denial, finding the proposed work lacks national importance because it would not impact the finance industry beyond the employer.

An international athlete sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification based on a one-time major award. The AAO found his European Tour Grand Final victory was not a major internationally recognized award qualifying as one-time achievement and dismissed the appeal without reaching final merits analysis.

Training and development manager sought EB-2 with national interest waiver. Petitioner did not establish underlying EB-2 eligibility as advanced degree professional or exceptional ability; failed to meet at least three of six regulatory criteria. AAO dismissed appeal.

A martial arts athlete self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed, finding the petitioner failed to meet three of ten evidentiary criteria. Awards lacked national/international recognition outside one association; membership status unsubstantiated; published material insufficient.

An accountant sought EB-2 classification as an advanced degree professional or exceptional ability individual, with a national interest waiver. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the occupation and endeavor were not sufficiently identified and exceptional ability was not shown, then declined to reach the waiver. This is not a Dhanasar waiver decision.

An advanced degree holder proposing business consulting and COVID-related kiosk services sought national interest waiver. The AAO found the petitioner impermissibly changed the substantive nature of his endeavor after filing and failed to show prospective impact rising to national importance level.

Business management consultant sought national interest waiver claiming endeavor of operational supervision and continuous improvement techniques. AAO held proposed endeavor lacked national importance, finding past company results insufficient to establish broad impact and applicant's qualifications relevant only to subsequent prong. Appeal dismissed.

Tennis coach seeking EB-2 NIW proposed operating a tennis academy. AAO held the specific endeavor lacks national importance despite assertions of tennis benefits and a product innovation; the record does not demonstrate national or global implications within the field or substantial positive economic effects beyond the business.

Chemist and dietary supplement manufacturer claiming extraordinary ability. Petitioner met only one criterion (scholarly articles published). Did not establish major significance of contributions; compounds lacked field-wide adoption; high remuneration claim uncorroborated. Record showed lack of sustained international acclaim or top-tier recognition required for extraordinary ability.

A physical therapist proposing to operate a business providing physical therapy and Pilates services, with potential cross-border consulting. AAO held that the petitioner failed the first prong by lacking sufficient evidence that the business would impact healthcare broadly or generate substantial economic effects at national level.

Operations professional sought EB-2 exceptional ability and national interest waiver. AAO found he met the educational credential criterion but not the salary criterion for exceptional ability. Because he failed the underlying EB-2 threshold, the national interest waiver analysis was not pursued.