Published AAO appeal decisions

Self-represented chef claiming extraordinary ability through Chinese cuisine awards, association membership, publication, judging participation and food exhibitions. AAO found awards unverified, membership routine, article improperly translated, judging invitation unsubstantiated, and venues for displays unidentified, failing to show sustained top-tier acclaim.

A researcher claiming extraordinary ability in sciences. Petitioner claimed membership, judging, original contributions, and scholarly article criteria. AAO found memberships require only basic credentials, no peer review evidence, research work not established as major contribution, and witness letters insufficient to show sustained acclaim. Appeal dismissed.

Orthopaedics researcher claimed extraordinary ability in sciences. Decision found petitioner accomplished but lacking sustained national or international acclaim at field's top. Multiple regulatory criteria not met; insufficient documentation of major contributions.

Optical engineer claims extraordinary ability through scholarships, internal award, manuscript review, and major contributions to fiber optics. AAO found significant scientific contributions but insufficient sustained acclaim at field's top level to meet EB-1A standard.

Rhythmic gymnastics coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed three criteria via Master of Sport designation, judging, and leading role in team success. AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim as coach and dismissed the appeal.

Scientist claimed EB-1A status as computational scientist based on patents, encyclopedia entries, and peer review work. AAO dismissed, finding awards academic only, memberships non-exclusive, self-published coverage inadequate, and contributions lacking major significance to demonstrate sustained national acclaim.

Business intelligence systems analyst and developer sought extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed judging, original contributions, and leading role. AAO found judging limited to employment duties, recommendation letters insufficient to show major field significance beyond acquaintances, and no documentary evidence of organizational role or reputation.

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.

Senior software engineer in computer vision sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petition initially approved but revoked. AAO affirmed revocation finding petitioner met no criteria. Evidence showed talent but insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field. Appeal dismissed.

A gymnastics coach claiming extraordinary ability based on alleged Olympic participation and coaching accomplishments. The AAO found no corroboration of Olympic participation, insufficient recognition of awards, inadequate published material documentation, and letters of support insufficient to demonstrate sustained national acclaim at the top of the field.

Musician and musical director filed EB-1A petition claiming extraordinary ability. Petitioner met only two of ten required criteria. AAO found regional success and upward career trajectory but insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field. Appeal dismissed.

A pharmacokinetics reviewer at the FDA seeking extraordinary ability classification based on awards, membership, published material, peer review, and leadership roles. The AAO found only published work met criteria; other evidence was insufficient to establish sustained national acclaim warranting extraordinary ability classification.

A self-represented petitioner seeking extraordinary ability classification with insufficient documentation. The AAO found awards lacked recognition evidence, membership did not meet criteria, published material was inadequately documented, judging duties were not established as professional-level, and no evidence showed intent to continue work in the United States.

A registered somatic movement therapist claimed extraordinary ability in sciences. She submitted a dance scholarship, association certifications, and peer-review activities as evidence. The AAO found the scholarship insufficient, certifications did not prove outstanding achievement, no published materials existed, and teaching did not constitute judging. She failed to meet the three-criterion threshold.

Research scientist with NSF funding and academic appointment claiming extraordinary ability. Submitted expert witness letters and job offers alongside article publications. AAO rejected awards, judging, and contribution claims; found publication expected at postdoctoral level insufficient; ruled research assistant role not leading or critical despite employer reputation. Appeal dismissed.

Pharmacokinetics reviewer at FDA sought EB-1A classification. The AAO found petitioner met only the scholarly articles criterion and failed to meet three required criteria. Evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the scientific field.

A recreational and movement therapist self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed awards, membership, published material, and judging criteria. AAO upheld director's denial, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or status within the small percentage at the very top of the field.

A power lifter from Uruguay seeking EB-1A classification claimed extraordinary ability through awards, judging, and organizational roles. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding only one criterion met and rejecting claims of leading role and sustained acclaim as personal trainer.

Counsel-represented postdoctoral researcher in sciences sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding insufficient evidence that petitioner achieved sustained national or international acclaim or ranked within the small percentage at the very top of his field.

Research chemist in supramolecular chemistry seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner claimed multiple criteria, met original contributions (novel compounds), but AAO dismissed appeal, finding only one criterion solidly met, insufficient judging and leading role evidence, and lack of sustained national or international acclaim required.

Classical music promoter, self-petitioner, claimed five criteria for extraordinary ability. AAO found membership, published material, judging, exhibitions, and leading role criteria unsatisfied. Evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level.

A research scientist claims extraordinary ability via awards, citations, judging, original contributions, scholarly articles, and conference presentations. The AAO found only the judging criterion met but concluded the overall evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim placing him at the field's very top.

Banking industry manager seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner claimed membership, published material, judging, leading role, and high salary. AAO dismissed, finding membership not based on achievement, internal publications undisclosed, judging routine job duty, no distinguished establishment role recognition, and insufficient salary evidence, failing three-criterion threshold.

A musician sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed multiple criteria including awards, membership, published material, and others. The AAO found only two criteria met, below the required three-criterion threshold, and concluded the evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement in the small percentage at the top.

Gymnastics coach self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability in athletics. AAO found petitioner met zero of criteria analyzed; though well-regarded by peers and employer, record lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim as gymnast or coach.