Published AAO appeal decisions

Journalist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Claimed four criteria; established only two: judging and leading critical role. Awards insufficient documentation; no evidence of national recognition. High salary claim lacked comparable industry data. Failed to meet three-criterion threshold for final merits analysis.

Comedy performer claimed seven extraordinary ability criteria including awards, published material, and original contributions. Met only exhibitions criterion. Awards and published material criteria failed on evidence defects. Did not reach remaining criteria because petitioner cannot numerically qualify. Appeal dismissed.

Project management specialist claimed three extraordinary ability criteria. Denied awards criterion lacking evidence of national or international recognition. Did not reach remaining claimed criteria because petitioner cannot numerically satisfy three-criterion threshold. Appeal dismissed.

A caviar business owner claiming extraordinary ability sought EB-1A classification based on sustainable aquaculture practices. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner failed to meet the major award threshold or three alternate criteria. Membership criterion was not met due to lack of documented personal membership; original contributions criterion failed as company success alone does not demonstrate field-wide significance.

A petroleum and industrial engineer self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability. He claimed five criteria but failed to establish three required criteria: awards lacked sufficient documentation, membership was abandoned, and scholarly articles did not meet plain language requirements. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding no evidence of sustained national or international acclaim.

A tattoo artist sought extraordinary ability classification under EB-1A. Though the petitioner met three initial criteria including judging and exhibitions, the AAO found the evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or membership in the very top of the field despite support letters and competition awards.

Sales and marketing specialist from Kuwait/Jordan seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner claimed six criteria including awards, published material, and original contributions. AAO found only leading critical role met. Serious credibility issues and lack of corroboration for claims prevented satisfaction of three required criteria.

Physical therapist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability claimed original contributions, leading role, and high salary criteria. AAO dismissed because petitioner met only one criterion; original contributions lacked demonstrated major significance and organization lacked distinguished reputation.

A general and operations manager claimed EB-1A classification in business based on seven criteria. The AAO found the petitioner abandoned all arguments on appeal by failing to address the director's concerns, concluded no criterion was met, and dismissed the appeal for lack of extraordinary ability.

Financial advisor and consultant claiming extraordinary ability. Met three EB-1A criteria per Director, but AAO withdrew two determinations and affirmed denial on final merits analysis. Totality of evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

A pilot and aviation consultant sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed three criteria but failed to establish any. Pilot certification is not association membership; employer companies lack documented distinguished reputation; salary evidence compared pilots not consultants. AAO dismissed, finding insufficient initial evidence.

Sports journalist claimed three EB-1A criteria. AAO found broadcast journalism evidence comparable to artistic exhibitions criterion. Leading role claim failed because award lacked national or international recognition. Only two criteria met; three required, so appeal dismissed without final merits determination.

Professional snooker and pool player self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO affirmed Service Center denial, finding only one of three claimed criteria met; helping establish snooker academy in Pakistan lacked national or international scope for major significance.

An athlete, referee and coach in horseback archery and polo seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO found she met one evidentiary criterion and demonstrated substantial U.S. benefit but failed to satisfy the minimum three required criteria, so dismissed appeal.

Investment banker self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO affirmed Service Center denial, finding petitioner failed to establish three required criteria: association membership, leading role, and published material were unsupported or waived on appeal.

A consultant and business analyst, who first sought a national interest waiver, claimed three extraordinary ability criteria: membership, original contributions and leading role. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the membership claim rested on training certifications, not qualifying association membership, making three criteria impossible. It reserved the other two criteria.

An entrepreneur in the digital exhibition field sought EB-1A classification. The service center accepted that the initial evidentiary criteria were satisfied, including membership, press coverage, judging, articles and a leading role, but denied at the final merits step. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the evidence did not place her among the field's top percentage.

A human resources professional in Brazil sought EB-1A classification. She claimed five criteria: membership, judging, original contributions, leading role, and high salary. The AAO found only judging was met and dismissed the appeal, concluding she failed to satisfy the required three criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.

Dentist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to satisfy the three required evidentiary criteria: the award lacked documentation of standards and selectivity, and membership requirements did not demonstrate recognition by national or international experts.

Independent film director from China sought EB-1A. AAO upheld denial: satisfied no claimed criteria. Awards not nationally recognized; association membership not documented; published article about work not about petitioner; original contributions unproven with only one feature and short film. Final merits review failed.

Management analyst petitioner claimed five EB-1A criteria. AAO affirmed service center finding that none met: award too limited in scope, membership was mere registration, contributions not of major significance, roles only supportive not critical. Zero of three required criteria satisfied; appeal dismissed without final merits review.

Martial arts athlete and coach seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal after finding petitioner met four initial criteria but lacked evidence of sustained acclaim at field top; competitive participation ended around 2017 and coaching credentials were underdeveloped.

Videographer seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed four criteria but satisfied none. Television trophy and regional prize do not constitute nationally or internationally recognized awards. Website reports and event participation do not meet artistic exhibition standard. Videographer role at news agency insufficient for critical role criterion. Appeal dismissed.

A marketing and communications specialist claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO found the Director correctly characterized her field as business rather than journalism and affirmed she failed to meet three of six claimed evidentiary criteria, falling below the minimum threshold required for final merits analysis.

A composer self-petitioner seeks EB-1A classification. The beneficiary satisfied at least three regulatory criteria but failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the very top of the field through press coverage and documentation. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the evidence insufficient for this highly restrictive classification.