Published AAO appeal decisions

A martial arts athlete competing in karate sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding he satisfied only two of three required criteria: judging and one other. Awards lacked national recognition; national team membership evidence was inconsistent regarding selection rigor.

A country club filed a motion to reopen and reconsider an O-1A denial for a tennis director. The AAO dismissed both motions for failure to meet procedural requirements: the motion lacked required statement about prior judicial proceedings and did not present proper cause, making merits review unnecessary.

A mountaineering guide and expedition leader sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, claiming five criteria. AAO affirmed two criteria were met but rejected membership and declined to reach other criteria. Because petitioner satisfied only two of ten required criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim, appeal was dismissed.

A martial artist sought extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed a motion to reconsider, finding the petitioner failed to meet the threshold of three initial evidentiary criteria, satisfied none of the claimed criteria, and the motion merely restated prior arguments without showing legal error.

Martial arts athlete and instructor claimed three criteria for EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO found one criterion met but dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to establish three required criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.

A wrestling coach claimed extraordinary ability, meeting three evidentiary criteria. The AAO found the evidence lacked comparative data showing he ranks among the very top coaches and that his media coverage and achievements did not demonstrate the sustained acclaim required.