Published AAO appeal decisions

Scientific researcher in synthetic carbohydrate chemistry claiming extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Petitioner failed to meet awards criterion; single institutional funding award does not satisfy regulatory requirement for nationally or internationally recognized prizes in plural. Appeal dismissed.

A ballet dancer sought EB-1A classification, claiming a one-time achievement through a competition gold medal and at least three regulatory criteria. The AAO held the medal was not a major, internationally recognized award and the record did not show sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing, so it dismissed the appeal.

Self-petitioner seeks EB-1A as financial manager in business. Met fewer than three regulatory criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim. AAO found evidence shows talent but does not demonstrate exceptional achievement setting petitioner significantly above others.

Self-petitioner seeks EB-1A as soccer coach. Petitioner's competitive playing career ended in late 1980s and no sustained national or international acclaim shown as coach. AAO found achievements significantly above others in field not demonstrated.

An acrobatic performer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed at least three evidentiary categories. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding awards not nationally or internationally recognized and evidence insufficient to demonstrate the petitioner ranks among the very top in the field.

A scientist claiming extraordinary ability in sciences. Appealing a denial, counsel asserted the petitioner met at least three regulatory criteria but offered only general assertions without specific evidence or addressing director's findings. AAO summarily dismissed for failure to identify specific errors or provide substantive appeal arguments.

Postdoctoral researcher in life sciences seeking extraordinary ability classification. Claimed multiple criteria including major award. AAO held petitioner did not meet three regulatory criteria and lacks sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Medical director claimed six EB-1A criteria. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim or extraordinary ability. Director found petitioner did not satisfy any claimed criteria, and three criteria were abandoned on appeal.

Competitive swimmer claimed three regulatory criteria including awards and sought comparable evidence consideration. AAO dismissed because evidence does not establish that petitioner's achievements set her significantly above almost all others at national or international level.

Visual effects professional claimed extraordinary ability through multiple regulatory criteria and comparable evidence. AAO affirmed dismissal because petitioner failed to meet the high burden of demonstrating sustained national or international acclaim and belonging among the very top of the field, despite meeting high salary criterion.

A self-represented economics professor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner failed to establish requisite sustained national or international acclaim through any of the regulatory criteria. The AAO found achievements not persuasively set him significantly above almost all others in his field and dismissed.

A neuroscientist filing for EB-1A extraordinary ability was denied. The petitioner established only the scholarly articles criterion but failed to meet three total criteria. The AAO found deficiencies in awards, published material about the applicant, and original contributions. The final merits determination concluded the evidence was insufficient for top-tier status.

An artist sought extraordinary ability classification, and counsel on appeal asserted that four criteria were met, covering awards, judging, exhibitions and commercial success. The appeal was summarily dismissed because counsel identified no specific error in the denial and the promised brief and evidence never arrived over fifteen months.

Postdoctoral research scientist sought EB-1A classification. Claimed at least three criteria including membership and published material. AAO found membership requirement unmet and published material evidence insufficient, and concluded overall evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Chef petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in culinary arts. Director found awards and leading role criteria met but rejected published material and high salary criteria. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement in top percentage of field despite meeting two criteria.