Published AAO appeal decisions

Former professional tennis player in Venezuela claimed extraordinary ability, citing historical tournament rankings, awards from late 1990s, and intentions to coach. AAO dismissed appeal, finding past awards and rankings insufficiently demonstrate sustained acclaim at time of filing and petitioner presented no evidence of active coaching work.

Self-represented artist seeking extraordinary ability classification failed to respond to director's evidence request despite receiving it at correct address. Director denied petition finding petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained acclaim or meet three of ten criteria. AAO summarily dismissed appeal because petitioner provided no specific challenge to director's findings or additional evidence on appeal.

Scientist in cell biology claimed extraordinary ability through professional awards and membership in scientific societies. AAO found petitioner did not establish sustained national or international acclaim at the top level, as awards were not nationally recognized and memberships did not require outstanding achievement.

Track and field athlete claimed extraordinary ability based on athletic awards and achievements. AAO found petitioner did not establish sustained national or international acclaim at the top level as of filing date, having failed to satisfy at least three regulatory criteria.

Film scholar claiming extraordinary ability in cinema studies. Petitioner claimed at least three criteria under EB-1A regulations. AAO found awards not nationally recognized, publications not in major media, scholarly articles insufficient for acclaim, and conference presentations lacked evidence of significance. Overall evidence did not demonstrate extraordinary ability.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because counsel failed to submit the promised brief and evidence more than 17 months after filing, and did not address the director's reasons for denial.

Hypnotherapist and entertainer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner failed to meet any of the regulatory criteria and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim placing him at the very top of his field.

Researcher in sciences sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding that while withdrawing some director concerns, the petitioner failed to meet at least three regulatory criteria and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of her field.

Martial artist and Tai Chi coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner achieved success as a competitor decades earlier but failed to sustain acclaim through subsequent coaching work and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level.

Microbiologist filed self-petition seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed at least three regulatory criteria including original contributions and scholarly articles. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.

Dance coach and instructor filed self-petition for EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner was a competitive dancer but claimed eligibility based on coaching career. AAO dismissed appeal, holding that lack of sustained national or international acclaim since 2003 and absence of evidence of coaching achievements at the very top level preclude approval.

A junior cell biology researcher and faculty member sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming awards, membership, contributions and scholarly articles. The AAO found the contributions and articles criteria carried more weight than the director allowed, but rejected awards and membership. Overall evidence did not show sustained acclaim at the top of the field, so the appeal was dismissed.

The petitioner is a cell biology researcher seeking extraordinary ability classification in the sciences. Several criteria were claimed, many only for the first time on appeal and without support. The AAO dismissed the appeal because no major award or three criteria were shown, and sustained acclaim was not established.

Self-petitioner in business sought extraordinary ability classification. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to identify any erroneous conclusions of law or fact, as required by regulation, after more than ten months without submitting promised documentation.

Self-petitioner in sports sought EB-1A extraordinary ability as an alien of extraordinary ability in arts and athletics. Claimed receipt of lesser nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards. AAO found evidence insufficient to establish sustained acclaim or position at very top of field; appeal dismissed.

The decision concerns a self-represented extraordinary ability petition denied by a service center for failing to show sustained acclaim. On appeal, the AAO dismissed the matter as moot because the petitioner had since been granted lawful permanent residence. No criteria were analyzed and the occupation is not stated.

Self-petitioner in sports sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed receipt of lesser awards and association membership. AAO found petitioner failed to meet criteria and provided insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or intent to continue in field.

Self-petitioner, a filmmaker, sought EB-1A extraordinary ability in the arts. Claimed association membership and published material through documentary evidence. AAO found membership criterion unmet, translations improper, and no evidence of sustained post-student success establishing top-level field position.

Self-represented athlete with multiple claimed fields (running, wrestling) sought extraordinary ability classification. AAO found no established primary field of endeavor, no documented prizes, and no evidence of sustained acclaim or critical role in any field.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed at least three regulatory criteria. AAO found petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim through awards, membership, or published material evidence, and did not establish eligibility as extraordinary ability alien.

Self-petitioner in sciences sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Submitted evidence of student awards and fellowships. AAO found petitioner failed to establish receipt of nationally or internationally recognized awards or sustained national or international acclaim at top level.

Self-petitioner initially approved for EB-1A extraordinary ability, then revocation proceeding initiated. Met awards criterion but failed membership and published material criteria. AAO sustained revocation, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field.

Singer petitioner claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Petitioner claimed awards, published materials, leading role, and commercial success criteria. AAO withdrew director's findings on awards and published materials for insufficient evidentiary support, found leading role and commercial success unmet, and concluded petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of her field.

An artist in the arts appealed a denial of extraordinary ability classification. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because counsel provided no specific arguments addressing the director's findings, no evidence supporting the claimed criteria, and failed to submit promised additional documentation over ten months after filing.

A circus performer claimed extraordinary ability and sought EB-1A classification. She claimed to meet two criteria: a second-place award and commercial success. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the award was not internationally recognized, lacked extensive documentation, occurred five years before petition filing, and she presented no evidence of commercial success.