Published AAO appeal decisions

Fencing coach self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability through six regulatory criteria. AAO found petitioner met fewer than three criteria under plain language: awards to students do not qualify, athlete membership does not satisfy coaching association requirement in plural form. Comparable evidence not available; petition dismissed.

Martial artist self-petitioner did not submit qualifying evidence under at least three regulatory criteria, failing the antecedent requirement. AAO concluded petitioner lacked sufficient evidence to proceed to final merits determination and dismissed appeal.

Perch pole balancing circus performer petitioner sought extraordinary ability classification. AAO found single award insufficient under plural requirement and rejected membership criterion. Petition dismissed because petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and placement among top performers in field.

Dance competitor and coach petitioner claimed extraordinary ability. Director found only awards criterion met. AAO upheld awards, upgraded judging to met, but found published material inadequate. With only two qualifying criteria, petition failed threshold requirement of three types of evidence for extraordinary ability classification.

Petitioner claimed extraordinary ability and relied on lesser prizes or awards criterion. AAO found petitioner did not submit qualifying evidence under at least three criteria and evidence demonstrated talent but not sustained national or international acclaim. Appeal dismissed.