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
1,159 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- EB-1AEducation and academiaMay 2025Dismissed
Dismissed · 4 criteria reviewed0 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementMay 2025Dismissed
A Canadian business manager and entrepreneur seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner met zero evidentiary criteria required for extraordinary ability and lacked sustained national or international acclaim as required by statute.
0 of 7 criteria metRead → - O-1AComputer science and AIMay 2025Dismissed
AI technology company petitioned for O-1A classification of chief technology officer. Beneficiary met only one criterion (judging); awards, membership, and published material criteria were not satisfied. Appeal dismissed because beneficiary could not meet minimum three criteria requirement for extraordinary ability.
1 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureMay 2025Dismissed
Video game developer petitioned for senior animator as extraordinary ability in arts. SCOPS found beneficiary met one criterion (judging); AAO dismissed, holding beneficiary met only judging criterion and failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim or elite status.
1 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementApr 2025Dismissed
A logistician sought EB-1A classification claiming four evidentiary criteria. The AAO affirmed dismissal, finding the petitioner failed to document individual association membership and lacked evidence of judging others' work in logistics. Meeting only two of ten required criteria precluded reaching final merits analysis.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementApr 2025Dismissed
A general and operations manager sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. SCOPS required evidence of intent to continue work in the field and national benefit; the petitioner did not respond to these concerns on appeal. The AAO dismissed based on waiver of the two dispositive statutory requirements.
0 of 1 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athleticsApr 2025Dismissed
A karate coach claimed extraordinary ability and sought to open karate schools in the United States. The AAO confirmed he met two criteria—judging and leading role—but dismissed because he failed to meet the minimum three-criterion threshold required for final merits consideration.
2 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athleticsApr 2025Dismissed
A basketball coach, formerly a player, sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Though three initial criteria were facially satisfied as a player, evidence lacked sustained national or international acclaim as a coach. Coaching career began post-filing; sparsely documented coaching does not demonstrate top-level recognition. AAO dismissed.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementApr 2025Dismissed
A chief executive officer selling Italian furniture sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO held the petitioner failed to establish three required criteria: published material lacked proper documentation, judging of manufacturers was not in an allied field, original business contributions lacked demonstrated major significance, and scholarly articles were not authored by petitioner.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AHealthcare, clinicalApr 2025Dismissed
Dentist and prosthodontist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Service center found three evidentiary criteria met but no sustained national or international acclaim. AAO affirmed, finding memberships and judging experience insufficient to show career of acclaimed work or placement among the very top of the field.
1 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athleticsApr 2025Dismissed
Mixed martial arts competitor claimed four criteria for extraordinary ability but satisfied only published material. Failed to meet three-criterion threshold. AAO held insufficient evidence of major awards, qualifying memberships, or judging participation, and that aggregate record does not demonstrate sustained acclaim or top-tier status required.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1ALife sciences and medicineApr 2025Dismissed
A medical researcher in microbiology and parasitology sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed four criteria. The AAO found original contributions and leading/critical role not met due to insufficient evidence of major field-wide significance and distinguished role. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet the three-criterion threshold.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureApr 2025Dismissed
A tattoo artist claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. The AAO found he did not meet three of ten criteria including awards, membership, and judging. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner lacks sustained national or international acclaim required for the highly restrictive classification.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEducation and academiaApr 2025Dismissed
Elementary school teacher sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed original contributions, scholarly articles, and high salary. AAO found only scholarly articles criterion met, falling short of the three required to proceed to final merits determination. Appeal dismissed.
1 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureApr 2025Dismissed
A ballroom dance choreographer claimed five evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability, already meeting two. The AAO upheld denials for awards lacking national or international recognition, membership not judged by recognized experts, and salary not shown high relative to the field. With only two criteria met, the petition was dismissed without final merits review.
2 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementApr 2025Dismissed
A general and operations manager sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, claiming six criteria. The AAO found he satisfied only the leading or critical role criterion but failed awards, membership, judging, and high salary criteria. The decision dismissed the appeal, finding no sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier field status.
1 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AMarketing, media, communicationsApr 2025Dismissed
Journalist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Claimed four criteria; established only two: judging and leading critical role. Awards insufficient documentation; no evidence of national recognition. High salary claim lacked comparable industry data. Failed to meet three-criterion threshold for final merits analysis.
2 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureApr 2025Dismissed
A tattoo artist sought extraordinary ability classification under EB-1A. Though the petitioner met three initial criteria including judging and exhibitions, the AAO found the evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or membership in the very top of the field despite support letters and competition awards.
3 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economicsApr 2025Dismissed
Financial advisor and consultant claiming extraordinary ability. Met three EB-1A criteria per Director, but AAO withdrew two determinations and affirmed denial on final merits analysis. Totality of evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEntrepreneurshipMar 2025Dismissed
An entrepreneur in the digital exhibition field sought EB-1A classification. The service center accepted that the initial evidentiary criteria were satisfied, including membership, press coverage, judging, articles and a leading role, but denied at the final merits step. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the evidence did not place her among the field's top percentage.
5 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementMar 2025Dismissed
A human resources professional in Brazil sought EB-1A classification. She claimed five criteria: membership, judging, original contributions, leading role, and high salary. The AAO found only judging was met and dismissed the appeal, concluding she failed to satisfy the required three criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.
1 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athleticsMar 2025Dismissed
Martial arts athlete and coach seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal after finding petitioner met four initial criteria but lacked evidence of sustained acclaim at field top; competitive participation ended around 2017 and coaching credentials were underdeveloped.
4 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureMar 2025Dismissed
A composer self-petitioner seeks EB-1A classification. The beneficiary satisfied at least three regulatory criteria but failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the very top of the field through press coverage and documentation. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the evidence insufficient for this highly restrictive classification.
3 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIMar 2025Dismissed
AI researcher with Ph.D. in electrical engineering seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met two criteria: judging and scholarly articles. AAO dismissed appeal, finding original contributions criterion not met due to insufficient evidence of major significance; bulk of work predates 2014 and citations concentrated before 2019, insufficient for sustained national acclaim.
2 of 5 criteria metRead → - O-1ABusiness and managementFeb 2025Dismissed
A company seeks O-1A classification for its financial vice president. The AAO found the beneficiary did not satisfy three required evidentiary criteria. Award evidence was not nationally or internationally recognized, membership and judging claims lacked comparability to regulatory standards, and the appeal was dismissed.
0 of 3 criteria metRead →
