Published AAO appeal decisions

Composer seeking extraordinary ability classification. Claimed four criteria; AAO found only judging criterion met. Record showed employment with major studios in increasing responsibility under established composer, but work on projects was supporting and uncredited. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner progressing toward top but lacking sustained national or international acclaim required.

Computer systems analyst working in SAP Basis administration claimed seven evidentiary criteria. AAO affirmed dismissal, finding only two criteria met (scholarly articles and high salary) but not the leading critical role criterion petitioner emphasized on appeal. Without three criteria met, petitioner lacks sustained acclaim at top of field despite successful career.

A dance instructor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Although meeting judging and leading role criteria, she failed to demonstrate original contributions of major significance or high salary relative to the field. The record lacked sufficient evidence of national or international acclaim required for the classification.

Horse breeding business petitioned for stallion manager as O-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner claimed seven criteria but AAO found only one met. Comparable evidence for awards criterion rejected because petitioner failed to show criterion does not apply to occupation. Appeal dismissed.

Film, commercial, and music video producer and founding executive of production company seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner met three evidentiary criteria. AAO affirmed denial on final merits, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or position at the very top of the field.

Professional auto racing team petitioned for an engineer employed since 2016. Petitioner met three evidentiary criteria but AAO found the totality of evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or position among the very top of the field of automotive engineering.

Visual artist and illustrator claiming extraordinary ability. Met two of ten criteria but failed to meet three required. Leading role and high salary claims rejected due to lack of organization documentation and insufficient earnings evidence. Record showed skilled artist with recognition but not sustained acclaim at required level.

A Chinese company manager petitioned for EB-1A classification claiming extraordinary ability. The applicant met two criteria (published material and leading role) but not the three required. On appeal, the membership criterion was rejected because the associations did not require outstanding achievements. The appeal was dismissed.

International law attorney filed 15th combined motion to reopen and reconsider EB-1A denial. Motion fails procedural requirements for reopening; newly submitted evidence post-dates petition filing and does not demonstrate eligibility at time of filing. Prior dismissal affirmed across multiple motions. Motion dismissed.

Media production agency petitioned for O-1A classification for senior vice president of production finance. AAO dismissed motions, finding only one criterion met and insufficient documentation of membership in associations requiring outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts.

A physical education specialist met three evidentiary criteria but failed the final merits analysis. The AAO found his peer review experience, publication record, and conference participation insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim among the top tier.

Executive producer in entertainment seeks EB-1A classification. Claimed four awards, published materials, leading role, and high salary. AAO found one award met criterion and director had already granted leading role criterion, but rejected claim of major internationally recognized award and found petitioner did not demonstrate extraordinary ability or sustained acclaim at top of field.

A digital product and business manager in mobile communications claimed three criteria but could not substantiate high remuneration with proper comparative salary data for UK positions and long-term compensation. AAO dismissed, finding the incomplete survey data inadequate and declining to reach other claimed criteria or prospective benefit analysis.

Soccer athlete and youth coach seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed one major award and satisfaction of at least three evidentiary criteria. AAO held coaching certificates are not major internationally recognized awards and evidence does not establish three criteria met. Record lacks extensive documentation of sustained national or international acclaim required for this classification.

Financial specialist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner met only one of ten evidentiary criteria (leading role) and failed to establish three required criteria. Evidence lacked specificity about major significance of contributions and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Competitive swimmer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification based on national medals and team membership. AAO affirmed that petitioner met only two of ten criteria, falling short of the required three. Appeal dismissed because petitioner lacked sustained acclaim and did not demonstrate placement among top of field.

Police officer and trainer in Brazil seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, claiming jiu-jitsu medal and various professional achievements. AAO found only three criteria met but rejected petition at final merits stage, finding petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim required for classification.

Visual artist and designer sought extraordinary ability classification. Satisfied three evidentiary criteria: published material, exhibitions, and leading role. AAO dismissed appeal because evidence of limited media coverage and nominal press over twenty years did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for top-tier status.

A producer and journalist from Venezuela seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability claimed six criteria. The AAO affirmed the Director's finding that she met two (judging, artistic display) but rejected four others (awards, membership, published material, leading role) and concluded her work in local media did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for the top tier.

Business operations specialist claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A, meeting two of ten criteria initially: leading role and high salary. On appeal, claimed published material criterion but AAO found translations inaccurate and uncertified. AAO dismissed, finding insufficient evidence of acclaim or top-tier status despite meeting two criteria.

A mathematical researcher petitioned by a financial management business for EB-1A classification. Four criteria were met: judging, scholarly articles, critical role, and high salary. However, the AAO dismissed the appeal because the totality of evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the very top in the field.

Opera singer claimed five criteria for extraordinary ability: lesser awards, published material, judging, artistic display, and leading roles. AAO found only two criteria met (judging and display) by the Director, but rejected three others. Published material lacked depth; leading roles involved organizations without distinguished reputation. Petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required.

A software developer and financial analyst sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding petitioner met only one of six claimed criteria and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required at top of field.

An artist agent, who is also a professor of studio arts, petitioned for a fine artist under the O-1 classification for extraordinary ability in the arts. This is O-1B, not O-1A. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the evidence did not satisfy three of the alternative regulatory criteria.

An economics instructor and former professor sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming scholarly articles, judging, original contributions and a leading or critical role. The AAO agreed two criteria were met but found the other two unmet because contributions lacked major significance and the organization's distinguished reputation was unproven, so the appeal was dismissed.