Published AAO appeal decisions

Business strategist and developer claimed extraordinary ability in strategic brand management. AAO found evidence of talent but not sustained national or international acclaim or top-level status. Awards, publications, and influence claims all inadequately documented.

A business researcher petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability in business. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding petitioner met only two required criteria; evidence of talent insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement at the very top of the field.

Commercial printing company petitioner seeking classification for beneficiary in business. Claimed beneficiary won prestigious awards and selections; AAO found special assignments and cadet-level awards lack required national or international recognition. Evidence insufficient to show extraordinary ability among small percentage at top of field.

A business development manager claimed extraordinary ability in sciences and business. The AAO found awards were presented too long ago, the membership claim lacked certified translation and demonstrated no outstanding achievement requirement, judging evidence was untranslated, and letters from supervisors could not establish major contributions beyond direct colleagues. Petitioner met fewer than three criteria.

Self-petitioner business operations specialist sought extraordinary ability classification. Claimed criteria relating to awards, contributions, and commercial success supported by tenant testimonies and consulate reference. AAO found regulatory criteria applied to business field and petitioner failed to meet any three; letter testimonies insufficient without meeting specific regulatory documentation requirements.

CEO claiming extraordinary ability in business submitted evidence of local company rankings, association membership, software development, and executive compensation. AAO found only one criterion met, concluding the applicant showed talent but lacked sustained national or international acclaim required for top-tier classification.

Self-petitioner management scientist claimed extraordinary ability via award, membership, and published material. AAO found Second-Class award insufficient due to incomplete documentation, no evidence of outstanding-achievement membership requirement, and Chinese-language articles do not constitute major media.

Senior business executive in sales and marketing at guitar company claiming extraordinary ability. AAO held no major award established and no three criteria met. Court rejected comparable evidence argument where regulatory criteria apply; evidence insufficient for sustained acclaim at very top level.

Market research analyst claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability in sciences or business. Petitioner submitted awards, memberships, and evaluation responsibilities but met no criteria. AAO found successful professional in Romania and valued employee in California but insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim. Appeal dismissed.

Self-petitioner seeks EB-1A classification as business person with extraordinary ability. Claimed awards, membership, published material, and leading role criteria. AAO rejected all criteria and concluded beneficiary is successful regional businessman without sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Self-petitioner seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability for beneficiary in business. Beneficiary president and CEO of successful furniture retail company in Arizona. AAO found evidence demonstrates successful local business reputation but not sustained national or international acclaim placing him among very top of field.

Inventor and consultant in packaging and industrial machines sought extraordinary ability classification. AAO found petitioner met two criteria but required three; evidence of patented inventions lacked corporate confirmation of national impact and sustained implementation.

A management scientist filed a self-petition for EB-1A. AAO found the petitioner failed to meet at least three criteria. Awards were second-class and insufficiently documented; publications appeared only in Chinese media lacking major attention; and original contributions lacked citations demonstrating field recognition. Appeal dismissed.

Software company president sought EB-1A classification in business. Claimed six criteria; met only leading critical role. AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or achievements setting him significantly above peers in the field. Appeal dismissed.

Employer petitioned for beneficiary, senior business executive in sales and marketing, for extraordinary ability. AAO rejected company awards and comparable evidence claim under regulation inapplicable to business field. Multiple applicable criteria existed; evidence insufficient to meet three required criteria.