AAO Decisions Explorer · Free
Published AAO appeal decisions
Search the decisions the Administrative Appeals Office has published, narrow them by visa, criterion, field and year, and read our summary of each one with a link to the official PDF.

Decisions in the library
6,586
6,586 classified
Visa types
3
Years covered
2005-2026
Latest decision
Aug 31, 2026
Filters
192 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- EB-1AFilm, music, performing artsDec 2024Dismissed
A musician sought EB-1A classification by claiming eight criteria. The AAO found one criterion satisfied but dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish three of ten required criteria. The decision held that the petitioner lacked the sustained national or international acclaim and top-tier status required for extraordinary ability.
1 of 9 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIDec 2024Dismissed
An AI researcher self-petitioning for EB-1A extraordinary ability. Claimed six evidentiary criteria and final merits assessment. AAO found only two criteria met (judging and scholarly articles), falling short of the required three. Record lacks evidence of major significance, widespread influence, or national acclaim necessary for extraordinary ability classification.
2 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureDec 2024Dismissed
A dancer and dance instructor seeks EB-1A classification. The petitioner claimed four criteria, but the AAO found the awards lacked national recognition and judging evidence was deficient. Two other criteria were reserved as not dispositive. The AAO dismissed because petitioner failed to meet either one major award or three of ten criteria, lacking sustained acclaim at the top of the field.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AAgriculture and foodDec 2024Dismissed
A CEO of an aquaculture company transitioning from decades in information technology claims extraordinary ability. He claimed four criteria, but the AAO held only one was satisfied. The decision ruled his IT accomplishments lack nexus to his stated aquaculture field and rejected his scholarly article as unrelated.
1 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementDec 2024Dismissed
CEO/manager in business sought EB-1A classification claiming three criteria: judging, leading role, and high salary. Director found only leading role established. AAO dismissed, holding high salary claim failed due to inadequate comparison data and insufficient differential from survey averages.
1 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIDec 2024Dismissed
A systems administrator specializing in cybersecurity claims extraordinary ability in cybersecurity and computer science. He claimed three criteria but satisfied only one. The AAO rejected his ISSA membership and scholarly articles evidence, finding insufficient documentation of extraordinary ability.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEnergy and climateDec 2024Dismissed
Self-petitioner integration architect in energy efficiency claiming extraordinary ability. Advanced three criteria on appeal; failed original contributions as major significance not demonstrated beyond employer context. AAO dismissed appeal because claimed criteria insufficient and aggregate record lacks sustained acclaim.
0 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AHealthcare, clinicalDec 2024Dismissed
A pharmacist sought EB-1A classification. She claimed membership in associations, scholarly articles, display at artistic events, and leading roles. The AAO affirmed the Director's finding that she met none of the ten criteria, failing to reach the required minimum of three, and dismissed the appeal.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementDec 2024Dismissed
Retail manager seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed five criteria: awards, judging, original contributions, leading role, and high salary. AAO held none met: training certificates not awards, model selection not judging, employer letters insufficiently document contributions or distinguished role, and salary evidence incomplete with timing defect.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFilm, music, performing artsDec 2024Dismissed
A Russian-trained musician seeks EB-1A classification for extraordinary ability. He claimed five criteria but only addressed awards on appeal. The AAO found he failed to satisfy three of ten criteria and lacks sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIDec 2024Sustained
A software developer specializing in 3D digital scanning since 1998, working as CTO for a major dental scanning company, sought EB-1A classification. The AAO found three criteria met and, reviewing the record holistically, determined the evidence established sustained national acclaim and top-tier status. Appeal sustained.
4 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEducation and academiaDec 2024Dismissed
A Kyrgyz history and culture scholar claims extraordinary ability in EB-1A. Director found evidentiary criteria met but denied on final merits. AAO sustained denial, finding the petitioner accomplished but not among the very top of the field despite national recognition and publications.
1 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athleticsDec 2024Dismissed
Gymnastics coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed five criteria; AAO found only judging criterion met. Appeal dismissed because petitioner failed to establish three required criteria and lacks sustained national or international acclaim at top of field.
1 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureDec 2024Dismissed
Author sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed, finding petitioner satisfied fewer than three initial regulatory criteria; withdrew published material finding and rejected high salary claim, concluding overall record lacks evidence of sustained acclaim required for top-tier classification.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementDec 2024Dismissed
A real estate broker sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed appeal on procedural grounds: petitioner failed to address errors in the Director's motion dismissal decision. On substantive review, salary evidence showed above-average earnings but lacked comprehensive comparative data required.
0 of 2 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureDec 2024Dismissed
Music event producer claimed six extraordinary ability criteria. Director found only judging criterion met. Petitioner appealed with new evidence on awards, original contributions, and exhibitions. AAO affirmed dismissal: awards lacked field recognition, exhibitions were not artistic in nature, and only one criterion met precluded the three-criterion threshold.
1 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIDec 2024Dismissed
Telematics systems engineer and CEO of tracking technology company. Self-petitioner seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met three of seven claimed criteria but failed final merits determination; lacked sustained national or international acclaim required for top-tier classification.
3 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athleticsDec 2024Dismissed
Brazilian jiu-jitsu competitor seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO affirmed denial because petitioner failed to meet major award criterion and could not satisfy three initial criteria. Tournament awards in Master division lack sufficient context and do not demonstrate excellence. No final merits analysis reached.
0 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AMarketing, media, communicationsNov 2024Dismissed
Social media influencer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner satisfied no evidentiary criteria. Platform Platinum status is objective threshold not requiring expert judgment; income alone insufficient for commercial success; record lacks evidence of sustained national acclaim or position at field's top tier.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureNov 2024Dismissed
Photographer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO held petitioner failed to meet three evidentiary criteria; membership and published material criteria were not satisfied. Final merits step not reached because criteria threshold not met.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureNov 2024Dismissed
A digital influencer with content on TikTok and YouTube sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claiming seven criteria, she established none sufficiently. The AAO rejected awards, membership, published material, original contributions, and commercial success findings; high salary and judging were not analyzed. Without three criteria met, she failed the initial requirement and was ineligible.
0 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athleticsNov 2024Dismissed
Long-distance runner sought EB-1A classification claiming extraordinary ability. AAO dismissed appeal finding one criterion met but aggregate evidence insufficient; runner did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or position among small percentage at field top.
1 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureNov 2024Dismissed
A visual artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Though the AAO found the petitioner satisfied at least three evidentiary criteria, she failed the final merits determination; her government and youth awards, membership, and modest annual media coverage did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the very top of the field.
4 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureNov 2024Dismissed
A beautician and eyelash artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She met at least three evidentiary criteria through awards, membership, published material, and judging work. However, the AAO found she failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that she ranks among the very top in her field, thus lacking the final merits showing required for the classification.
4 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AMechanical and aerospace engineeringNov 2024Dismissed
Drilling engineering executive claiming extraordinary ability. Met three regulatory criteria: judging, leading role, and high salary. AAO held final merits not satisfied; accomplishments lack sustained national or international acclaim sufficient to establish top-tier status in field.
3 of 9 criteria metRead →
