Published AAO appeal decisions

A television editor seeking extraordinary ability classification. The AAO affirmed denial, finding awards not nationally recognized (thousands awarded annually) and published material not primarily about the petitioner. No major award received and fewer than three criteria met; achievements do not rise to top of field.

A professional seeking EB-1A classification claiming three criteria through published material and original contributions. The AAO affirmed denial, finding published material did not meet requirements and letters from acquaintances lacked probative value. No evidence of sustained national or international acclaim at the very top.

A quality assurance manager in film restoration claiming extraordinary ability in rheology and civil engineering. The AAO upheld denial, finding no sustained national or international acclaim. Awards were outdated and for service, not excellence; membership criteria unestablished. Petitioner failed to demonstrate place among the very top.

A dulcimer player filed an EB-1A petition claiming extraordinary ability in the arts. The AAO affirmed denial, finding the single 1990 national award could not demonstrate sustained acclaim in 2006, and membership and judging evidence lacked sufficient documentation. The overall evidence showed past talent but not sustained national or international acclaim.

A kickboxer filed an EB-1A petition claiming extraordinary ability in athletics. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding amateur awards do not demonstrate position at the very top of the field, and evidence of sustained acclaim was absent. Inconsistencies in submitted documentation also undermined credibility of intent to continue the sport.

A journalist filed an EB-1A petition claiming extraordinary ability. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner failed to meet a major award threshold or three criteria: awards lacked national or international recognition, membership did not require outstanding achievement, and published material was authored rather than about the petitioner.

A musician seeking EB-1A classification claimed published material about his work. The AAO found articles did not identify the petitioner by name and were not about him. Overall, the evidence demonstrated talent but not sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.

A violinist sought EB-1A classification based on awards and achievements. The AAO found finalist selections, scholarships, and student competition awards insufficient; they do not evidence nationally or internationally recognized prizes for artists of all levels, only early-career musicians.

An artist self-petitioner claimed awards, membership, published material, and judging criteria. The AAO found no nationally or internationally recognized awards met the criterion; membership lacked outstanding achievement requirement; published materials lacked certified translations; and judging role did not indicate extraordinary acclaim.

An analytical chemist sought extraordinary ability classification in the sciences. Petitioner abandoned the membership criterion on appeal and did not meet awards, published material, or aggregate criteria. The AAO found the petitioner talented but not distinguished enough to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. Petition denied.

A film or television professional sought extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed three regulatory criteria. The AAO found awards limited to collegiate competitions inadequate, membership not based on outstanding achievement, and no published materials meeting the standard. The petition was denied as the petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.

A fashion designer sought extraordinary ability classification. The director found sustained acclaim was not shown. On appeal, counsel cited the comparable evidence provision and promised more material, but nothing arrived in over eight months. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because no specific error of law or fact was identified. No criteria were analyzed.

Filmmaker in Nepal seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. Claimed awards, association memberships, and published material. AAO found awards and memberships did not meet regulatory criteria; published material insufficient. Overall evidence fails to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim placing petitioner at very top of field.

Computer scientist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed achievement through three awards from the early 1990s and high salary. AAO found awards limited by age eligibility, temporally distant, and withdrawn salary claim insufficient. Overall evidence fails to demonstrate sustained acclaim at the very top of the field.

A self-represented scientist sought extraordinary ability classification. The director found sustained acclaim was not shown. On appeal, the petitioner only asserted generally that more than three criteria were met, without elaboration or new evidence. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failing to identify any specific erroneous conclusion. No criteria were analyzed.

Musician self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in arts. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to establish any criterion and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of her field.

Research associate self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in sciences. AAO affirmed denial, finding petitioner failed to demonstrate major award or meet three regulatory criteria and lacked sustained acclaim at the very top of field.

Taekwondo competitor and coach self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in athletics. AAO affirmed denial, finding petitioner failed to establish any criterion and lacked sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of his field as competitor or coach.

A martial artist claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability in athletics based on age-group wushu competition wins and Dan rank advancement. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the awards lacked national or international recognition and the evidence did not establish sustained acclaim at the very top of the field.

A petitioner claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability based on competition awards, association lifetime membership, and published materials. The AAO dismissed, finding awards lacked documentation of national or international recognition, membership did not require outstanding achievement, the publication did not relate to his field work, and evidence did not show sustained acclaim.

A research scientist claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability in life sciences based on fellowship, association membership, publications, and guest speaking. The AAO dismissed, finding the fellowship undocumented, membership not based on outstanding achievement, publications routine to the field, no judging role, and insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim.

A scientist in the sciences claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability based on a university award, research grant funding, and association membership. The AAO dismissed, finding the award limited to university Ph.D. candidates and the grant designed for future research rather than recognizing achievement, membership not based on outstanding achievement, and evidence insufficient to show sustained national or international acclaim.

Folk singer petitioner claimed membership in entertainment association. AAO rejected membership criterion as not meeting standards requiring outstanding achievement judged by experts, and found overall evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of her field.

Physicist petitioner self-represented and claimed membership in Sigma Xi and Optics Society of America, published material recognition, and judging role. AAO found membership requirements reflect research activity not outstanding achievement, publications not in major media, and no evidence of judging based on reputation.

Martial arts competitor and coach petitioner claimed awards from national wushu competitions. AAO found awards reflect competitive success but no coaching credentials or evidence of instructing athletes at national level, insufficient for sustained national or international acclaim.