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
110 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- O-1ABusiness and managementSep 2024Dismissed
Dismissed · 8 criteria reviewed2 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementSep 2024Dismissed
Business development executive sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed four criteria; director found only judging satisfied. AAO affirmed that published book was not scholarly article, original contributions lacked major significance in field, and evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.
1 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementJul 2024Dismissed
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.
3 of 10 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementJun 2024Dismissed
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.
2 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementApr 2024Dismissed
Chief financial officer filed as self-petitioner for extraordinary ability. Claimed six evidentiary criteria. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to meet at least three criteria: membership letter merely repeated regulations, published materials were brief mentions not about his work, judging claim lacked specificity, and original contributions were unsubstantiated assertions without evidence of major significance.
0 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementNov 2023Sustained
A big data center consultant sought extraordinary ability classification in business. He met three initial evidentiary criteria and demonstrated sustained national recognition as an expert, including leadership of technology standards groups. The AAO sustained the appeal, finding he is among the small percentage at the very top of his field.
4 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementOct 2023Dismissed
Business sustainability specialist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Director found two criteria met. Petitioner claimed five additional criteria on appeal. AAO affirmed only two criteria satisfied, finding no major, nationally recognized award and insufficient evidence of extraordinary ability or top-tier status.
2 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementOct 2023Dismissed
Chief executive in small business development seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met two of ten regulatory criteria: judging and scholarly articles. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to meet three criteria required for EB-1A eligibility and did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or top-tier recognition.
2 of 9 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementOct 2023Dismissed
A gender, diversity, and inclusion specialist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She met the initial evidence threshold but failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim. She performed critical roles for organizations but lacked evidence of major contributions to the broader field or recognition as among the very top in her field.
1 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementOct 2023Dismissed
A business professional in enterprise resource planning software sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed judging, original contributions, high salary, and commercial success criteria. The AAO found his mentoring did not constitute judging, his patented chatbot lacked field-wide significance compared to major competitors like Siri and Alexa, and he satisfied only one criterion, failing the threshold.
0 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementJun 2023Dismissed
Plant accountant sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in business. AAO found petitioner met only judging criterion but lacked sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability. Appeal dismissed; petitioner did not qualify for highly restrictive visa classification intended for individuals at top of field.
1 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementJun 2023Dismissed
Restaurant general manager with twenty-five years of experience sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to establish major award or meet three of ten regulatory criteria, particularly membership with demonstrated outstanding achievements, judging, and high salary comparable to field peers.
0 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementApr 2023Dismissed
Senior project manager in business management claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Petitioner met judging and high salary criteria but failed awards, membership, and original contributions criteria. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner satisfied only two of the required three alternate criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.
2 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementSep 2022Sustained
An oil and gas industry executive sought extraordinary ability classification. The service center found the initial criteria met but denied on final merits. The AAO sustained the appeal, finding additional criteria satisfied and concluding that the whole record showed sustained acclaim and top-of-field standing, which the director had overlooked.
5 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementAug 2022Dismissed
A self-petitioner hospitality entrepreneur sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found the petitioner met two of ten criteria (published material and judging). The decision dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish the required three criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim outside his employment contexts.
2 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementJun 2021Dismissed
Media management expert sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed judging, leading role, salary, and original contributions criteria. AAO found only judging criterion met; one criterion insufficient. Record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementApr 2021Dismissed
Development director self-petitioned for EB-1A visa. Applicant met three evidentiary criteria but appeal dismissed on final merits. Motions to reopen and reconsider dismissed because petitioner submitted no new facts or evidence and failed to show AAO misapplied law or policy.
3 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementApr 2021Dismissed
Administrative services manager claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. AAO dismissed motions to reopen and reconsider because petitioner failed to provide new evidence timely, did not demonstrate erroneous application of law, and did not establish any of the eight evidentiary criteria.
0 of 9 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementFeb 2021Dismissed
Business development specialist self-petitioner claimed four criteria and extraordinary ability. AAO upheld finding of three criteria met but determined overall evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.
3 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementFeb 2021Dismissed
A vice president and chief content officer at a media company sought EB-1A classification. She met three criteria: judging, leading role, and high salary. However, the AAO found the totality of evidence insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.
3 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementJan 2021Dismissed
Project commercial manager in rail transportation claims extraordinary ability. AAO found judging evidence lacks specificity and documentation. Final merits analysis shows work on high-profile projects insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim at field's top.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementJan 2021Dismissed
A CEO and business training center founder claimed seven criteria for extraordinary ability, satisfying three initially. The AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim, with media coverage local rather than national, dismissing the appeal.
3 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementNov 2020Dismissed
A finance minority business coach sought EB-1A. Met judging and leading critical role criteria. Additional claims for awards, membership, and published material rejected. Only two of three required criteria satisfied. No sustained national acclaim or top-field status demonstrated despite claimed contributions.
2 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementAug 2020Dismissed
Product manager and consultant claimed five EB-1A criteria. Director found only judging criterion met; AAO affirmed. Published material criterion failed due to PR involvement and non-major media outlets. Other claimed criteria not substantively analyzed. Final merits finding against petitioner: record showed successful career progression but not top-tier sustained acclaim required.
1 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementAug 2020Dismissed
Self-petitioner chief operating officer seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met three evidentiary criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and leading critical role. AAO dismissed appeal, finding insufficient sustained national or international acclaim and recognition to demonstrate extraordinary ability at top-tier level.
3 of 7 criteria metRead →
