Published AAO appeal decisions

An actor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She met four evidentiary criteria but the AAO agreed with the director that the record does not establish sustained national or international acclaim or that she ranks among the top small percentage of actors in her field. Appeal dismissed.

A visual artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claiming six criteria. The AAO found two criteria met (published material and display of work) but this falls short of the three minimum required. The remaining claimed criteria were either rejected or abandoned, and the overall record did not demonstrate sustained national acclaim or placement among the very top of the field.

CEO of beverage company manufacturing energy drinks claimed extraordinary ability status. AAO held petitioner satisfied only one of ten required evidentiary criteria (published materials) but failed to establish three minimum; insufficient evidence of national or international acclaim or recognition in field.

A singer sought EB-1A classification claiming five criteria. The AAO affirmed the director's finding that the applicant met only the exhibitions criterion. The claimed awards and leading role criteria failed because the petitioner did not establish that awards recognized excellence in the field or that his success was sustained and internationally acclaimed.

A senior director of product management met three of ten EB-1A criteria (judging, scholarly articles, leading role). However, the AAO upheld dismissal on final merits, holding the record demonstrates some field recognition but fails to show sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability at the very top.

Fashion and lifestyle blogger seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed eight criteria beyond leading role already conceded. AAO affirmed director's findings that awards lacked field recognition, memberships did not qualify, published material source was not major media, and judging post-dated filing. Appeal dismissed for failing three-criterion threshold.

Gymnastics trampoline and tumbling coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed three criteria: membership in associations, leading or critical role, and comparable evidence of awards. AAO found one criterion met but insufficient to reach three-criterion threshold, thus dismissed the appeal without addressing final merits.

A physician in diagnostic radiology residency seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding only two criteria met and concluding the beneficiary lacks the sustained national or international acclaim required for the small percentage at the very top of the field.

A furniture designer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed three criteria: awards, published material, and exhibitions. The AAO found he met awards and exhibitions criteria but failed published material because he provided no objective evidence establishing that articles were published in major media or professional trade publications.

A judoka petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed three criteria: awards, membership, and published materials. The AAO affirmed the Service Center's denial, finding the petitioner failed to meet any three criteria; awards and membership lacked documented national significance and recognition standards.

A salsa dancer, choreographer and instructor claims extraordinary ability. The AAO affirmed dismissal because the petitioner demonstrated only two of ten required criteria: judging and exhibitions. The remaining claimed criteria were not sufficiently established, falling short of the three-criterion threshold for final merits review.

An engineering and management professional sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming seven of the ten evidentiary criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal. The petitioner showed neither a major one-time award nor three criteria, since the awards were internal or student honors lacking national recognition, and the record as a whole showed no sustained acclaim.

Chinese stage actor with thirty years experience and director role sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO affirmed denial, finding petitioner met initial evidentiary criteria but lacked evidence of sustained acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

A production designer and student sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed six evidentiary criteria but satisfied only one. The AAO dismissed her appeal, finding she failed to establish at least three criteria: the award was not hers and not nationally recognized, and published material concerned her employer, not her work.

A jiu-jitsu athlete self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability status, claiming five evidentiary criteria. The AAO found awards established one criterion but rejected membership and judging as not meeting regulatory requirements. The decision concluded the petitioner lacked the sustained acclaim and top-tier recognition required for the classification.

Brazilian jiu-jitsu athlete and coach seeks extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner established two of ten criteria but failed to meet three-criterion threshold. Original contributions and leading critical role claims rejected as unsupported by evidence of significant field impact. AAO found petitioner lacked sustained acclaim required for top-tier status.

Model sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO found petitioner met display and judging criteria but failed to satisfy published material and high salary criteria. Record lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for classification among small percentage at top of field.

An operations manager at an e-commerce company claimed seven extraordinary ability criteria. The service center accepted judging and leading role. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the award not shown to be nationally recognized, membership abandoned, and the articles not in major media, leaving only two criteria and no final merits review.

Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu coach with 40+ years experience seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met only two of ten required criteria: judging and leading role. Failed to demonstrate major international award or sufficient acclaim to establish extraordinary ability standard.

A retired professional soccer player seeks EB-1A classification. He satisfied four initial evidentiary criteria. However, the AAO affirmed the director's final merits finding that his career lacked sustained national or international acclaim, with media coverage concentrated in 2011-2015 rather than throughout his career.

A dance instructor seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claimed four criteria. The Director found only judging satisfied. On appeal, the petitioner could not establish three of ten required criteria. The AAO dismissed, holding that the record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim and does not demonstrate membership in the top small percentage of the field.

Bioinformatics researcher with physics PhD and postdoctoral experience seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO held petitioner met only one of three required criteria (scholarly articles) and failed to establish major award, so extraordinary ability not demonstrated.

A television producer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed because the petitioner satisfied fewer than three of the required ten regulatory criteria. She failed to establish a major award, proper professional association membership, contemporaneous published material about her, and judging participation that existed at the time of filing.

Design and marketing executive specializing in aircraft livery seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed five criteria beyond major award; AAO found two met by director, rejected membership and published material on examination of association standards and publication circulation. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet initial three-criterion threshold and lack of sustained international acclaim.

A data scientist self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. AAO dismissed because petitioner did not satisfy three regulatory criteria; scholarly articles criterion was withdrawn, leaving only two criteria met, and record lacks evidence of sustained acclaim at field's top.