Published AAO appeal decisions

Self-petitioner painter sought extraordinary ability classification. Evidence included membership in Dokuritsu Art Association with national recognition requirements, exhibitions at Tokyo Art Museum and New York galleries, and published material. AAO found petitioner met three criteria, established sustained national acclaim, and showed plans to continue work in United States; petition approved.

A research scientist in the sciences sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed to meet awards, membership, and published material criteria through a pending patent, research grants, professional association membership, and citations to her work. The AAO found none of the criteria satisfied because the evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level required.

A filmmaker in the arts sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed awards and critical role criteria through a Grand Prix award and acclaimed directorial and commissioning work. The AAO found the critical role criterion met but awards not met; meeting only one of three required criteria, the petition was denied.

A pediatric cardiac surgeon and founder of a nonprofit cardiac surgery foundation seeks EB-1A classification. He claimed at least three regulatory criteria were met. The AAO found he satisfied the criteria and established sustained national acclaim as one of the small percentage at the top of his field, and would continue his work in the United States.

A self-represented individual seeks EB-1A classification for extraordinary ability in a beauty-related field. He claimed awards, published material, judging experience, and scholarly articles. The AAO found none of the criteria met and concluded the evidence does not establish he has risen to the very top of his field.

Self-petitioner claims extraordinary ability in unspecified field. Petition denied due to submission of falsified documents supporting the claim. AAO found fraud and material misrepresentation, dismissing appeal without substantive analysis of extraordinary ability criteria.

Musician claimed extraordinary ability based on judging, publications, original contributions, scholarly articles, and exhibitions. AAO found musician met judging criterion but failed publications, original contributions, scholarly articles, and exhibitions criteria. Evidence demonstrated talent and some national exposure but not sustained acclaim at the very top level.

A solo musician petitioned for EB-1A classification based on extraordinary ability in the arts. The AAO found that claimed awards, memberships, published material, and exhibitions failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the very top of the field, and dismissed the appeal.

Chemistry researcher and acting instructor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in sciences. Claimed awards, membership, and scholarly articles. AAO found patent insufficient, fellowship limited to young researchers not indicative of top-level acclaim. Appeal dismissed for failure to establish position among small percentage at very top of field.

Environmental manager in business sustainability claimed to meet at least three EB-1A criteria. AAO found membership criterion unmet, original contributions and scholarly articles unsupported by extensive documentation, and leading role unestablished. Overall evidence insufficient for extraordinary ability at the top of field.

Business professional petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed at least three criteria met. AAO found published materials lacked proper documentation, single invention did not constitute major contributions, and salary unsubstantiated as exceptional. Appeal dismissed for failure to establish sustained acclaim at top level.

Phlebology professional claiming extraordinary ability in sciences. Petitioner submitted evidence of awards, membership, and published material. AAO found awards lacked national or international recognition, membership did not meet regulatory requirements, and published materials were not primarily about the petitioner. Petition denied.

Dance teacher and competitive dancer self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. AAO found only three criteria addressed: awards from youth and amateur competitions insufficient, no published material in major media, and coaching success limited to youth level. Appeal dismissed despite adequate evidence of intended continued work.

Molecular geneticist claiming extraordinary ability in sciences. Petitioner claimed meeting criteria for awards, membership, published material, judging, and scholarly articles. AAO rejected all criterion claims, finding thesis award recognized academic rather than professional excellence, insufficient publication impact, limited judging scope, and modest citation record. Aggregate evidence showed talent but not top-tier distinction.

Ballroom dancer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in athletics. Petitioner claimed awards and membership in professional organization. AAO found one award criterion met but membership criterion not satisfied, and concluded evidence demonstrated talent but not sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level.

A petitioner of unstated occupation sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, and the director denied the petition for lack of sustained acclaim. On appeal, counsel gave only a general statement and promised a brief that never arrived. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because no specific error was identified.

Athletic competitor self-petitioner appealed revocation of initially approved EB-1A petition. Petitioner failed to submit substantive brief or evidence addressing regulatory criteria and did not specifically identify director's erroneous findings. Appeal summarily dismissed for inadequate appellate submission.

Mountain climber sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in athletics. Met awards criterion with presidential medal; failed membership and published material criteria. Evidence of only one criterion met insufficient; no demonstration of sustained national acclaim or top percentile of field.

Self-petitioner artist claims extraordinary ability through awards, membership, and exhibitions. AAO affirmed service center denial, finding only local recognition, no recent achievements, and failure to meet three required criteria. Decision also found fraud and material misrepresentation regarding biographical history.

A self-represented petitioner of unstated occupation sought EB-1A classification and was denied for lacking sustained acclaim. On appeal, it said the wrong classification had been checked. Records showed the beneficiary had already adjusted to permanent resident status through another petition, so the AAO dismissed the appeal as moot without examining criteria.

A paper-cutting artist sought extraordinary ability classification. She claimed awards and institutional recognition. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner submitted fraudulent documentation and failed to demonstrate national or international acclaim at the very top level.

A research associate in the sciences claimed membership, judging activity, and scholarly articles. The AAO found the membership criterion not met because Sigma Xi has 70,000 members, peer review is routine, and citation counts were not remarkable. Appeal dismissed.

Traditional Albanian folk singer claimed extraordinary ability through awards, publications, original contributions, and critical roles in performances. AAO found no major international award and fewer than three criteria met, with outdated evidence of acclaim prior to filing.

Research scientist self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability through awards, membership, publications, and original contributions. AAO dismissed appeal, finding only original contributions criterion satisfied but insufficient overall to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at top level.

Pianist self-petitioner sought EB-1A classification claiming extraordinary ability through membership, published material, and commercial success. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to meet three regulatory criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim warranting top-tier classification.