Published AAO appeal decisions

Hookah lounge manager self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in business. AAO found petitioner failed to meet any of the three required initial criteria: awards lacked national or international recognition, no qualifying association memberships were demonstrated, and his managerial role did not meet the distinguished reputation and critical impact standard.

A water-skier self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability. The AAO found three criteria met: awards, membership in national team, and published material. On final merits, the petitioner demonstrated sustained national and international acclaim as the most successful water-skier in his timeframe, qualifying him for EB-1A classification.

A figure skater self-petitioner claimed four EB-1A criteria. The AAO found only exhibitions met. Published material lacked required documentation; leading/critical role and high salary failed to meet plain language requirements. With fewer than three criteria met, no final merits analysis was conducted; appeal dismissed.

A competitive swimmer self-petitioner claimed four EB-1A criteria. The AAO found only membership met through national team and Olympic representation. Awards, published material, and leading/critical role failed requirements. With one criterion met instead of three, the appeal was dismissed without final merits analysis.

Project assistant engineer seeking EB-1A in sciences. Failed to establish major internationally recognized award or three criteria. Original contributions and exhibitions criteria not met; insufficient evidence of artistic displays or major significance. AAO dismissed appeal finding no evidence of top-of-field status.

A traditional Chinese medicine physician sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found the petitioner satisfied only two criteria: judging and scholarly articles. The petitioner claimed three additional criteria but failed to demonstrate they were met. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner did not meet the required threshold of at least three criteria.

A biostatistics researcher with a Ph.D. sought an EB-2 national interest waiver. He proposed research improving clinical trial design and quality-of-life studies. The AAO sustained his appeal, finding all three Dhanasar prongs satisfied: substantial merit and national importance, well-positioned qualifications, and net benefit to the nation.

Neonatologist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met only two initial criteria: scholarly articles and leading role. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to meet three-criterion threshold and aggregate record did not demonstrate sustained national acclaim or top-tier expertise.

An ultramarathon runner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed five criteria beyond the one awarded criterion. The AAO found only awards met; membership lacked outstanding achievement requirement, published material involved non-major sources, original contributions lacked field significance, exhibitions criterion inapplicable, and leading role unestablished. Appeal dismissed.

A medical technology researcher sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director found two criteria met; petitioner claimed two more. AAO found judging and scholarly articles met but original contributions lacked significance and leading role unproven. Only three criteria met but final merits analysis concluded no extraordinary ability. Appeal dismissed.

A materials science researcher sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO agreed three criteria were met: judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles. However, final merits analysis found citation evidence lacking and peer reviewer role insufficient to establish sustained national acclaim or ranking among very top researchers. Appeal dismissed.

Technological entrepreneur seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in business. Claimed three criteria including published material, critical role, and high salary. AAO affirmed published material was met but rejected critical role and high salary claims as lacking substantiation. Appeal dismissed because petitioner failed to satisfy three required initial criteria.

Postdoctoral physiology researcher seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed to satisfy original contributions of major significance, the claimed third criterion. Citation counts and research impact letters lacked specificity regarding field-wide importance. Appeal dismissed for failing to meet three required criteria.

Ph.D. researcher in electrical engineering sought national interest waiver for EB-2 classification with proposed soft electronics research. AAO found research had substantial merit and national importance but petitioner not well positioned to advance it; support letters and publications lacked demonstrated widespread influence or comparative success metrics. Appeal dismissed.

Research fellow sought national interest waiver for EB-2 classification. Appeal was dismissed as moot because petitioner had adjusted status to lawful permanent resident as of March 20, 2017, rendering the proceeding issues no longer live.

An engineer developing power system control algorithms sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding he met only two of three required criteria and failed to demonstrate final merits. The record did not establish major significance or sustained acclaim required for the classification.

Geophysicist seeking EB-2 national interest waiver for geophysical data processing consulting. Claimed work has substantial merit but lacks national importance because impact extends only to specific clients in oil and gas industry, not the field broadly. Appeal dismissed.

Irish dance teacher seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Meets judging and leading/critical role criteria but only two of ten required; fails to establish original contributions, awards, membership, published material, or high salary. Lacks evidence of sustained acclaim. Appeal dismissed.

Actress seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director found four criteria met but AAO withdraws published material and leading/critical role findings, leaving only judging and exhibitions; insufficient to establish sustained national acclaim or top-tier status. Appeal dismissed.

Environmental engineering researcher sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner met three evidentiary criteria: judging, original contributions of major significance, and scholarly articles. AAO sustained appeal, finding the totality of evidence demonstrated sustained acclaim and recognition as among the very top of the field.

Trauma surgeon and cancer researcher seeks EB-2 national interest waiver. Claimed three Dhanasar prongs: substantial merit and national importance of breast cancer research, capability to advance it, and net benefit to United States. AAO sustained appeal, finding all three prongs satisfied by evidence of research impact and petitioner's demonstrated expertise.

Barista with competition wins and judging experience seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met awards and judging criteria but failed to satisfy published material criterion due to missing documentation requirements and unsubstantiated claims about publication standing. Dismissed because only two of three required criteria met.

Television producer with over 30 years experience seeks extraordinary ability classification in education. Claims five criteria met. AAO found only judging criterion satisfied; record does not support three required criteria. Appeal dismissed; final merits not addressed.

Choreographer and coach sought extraordinary ability classification in sensory therapy field. Met only judging criterion. Published material, membership, and awards criteria not met; publications lacked documentation and translations. Failed to establish initial three-criterion requirement. Appeal dismissed without final merits analysis.

Gymnastics coach sought extraordinary ability, meeting three evidentiary criteria: awards, published material, and judging. AAO sustained criteria analysis but dismissed on final merits, finding acclaim was based on past athletic career decades earlier, not sustained coaching achievements at required level.