Published AAO appeal decisions

Ice figure skater sought EB-1A classification. Petitioner met awards criterion but failed membership criterion because associations did not require outstanding achievement. Final merits analysis found evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained acclaim at very top of field.

A taekwondo instructor appealed denial of EB-1A classification, claiming awards, memberships, and leading roles. The AAO affirmed dismissal, finding competitions not nationally recognized, coaching role not qualifying membership, and petitioner failing to meet the three-criteria threshold needed for extraordinary ability.

The petitioner, apparently a competitor in a team-based field, sought extraordinary ability classification, relying on awards and on membership in teams and committees. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the award evidence was not legible primary documentation and the team and committee roles did not satisfy the membership requirements.

A competitive performer sought extraordinary ability classification. AAO held that claimed awards did not satisfy plural requirement and lacked primary documentation; committee memberships did not establish elite status. Appeal dismissed for insufficient regulatory criteria evidence.

Gymnastics coach sought EB-1A classification. AAO upheld denial, finding coach did not meet awards, membership, or published material criteria under plain language requirements and failed to establish sustained acclaim.

Coach or manager in athletics sought extraordinary ability classification. AAO found awards and membership criteria not met under plain language standards. Fewer than three criteria satisfied. Petitioner must demonstrate continued work in coaching expertise. Appeal dismissed.

Athlete in athletics claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A, asserting membership, original contributions, and judging criteria. The AAO upheld the director's denial, finding petitioner failed to establish three qualifying evidentiary categories required by regulation, thus falling short of the sustained national or international acclaim standard.

Karate practitioner and coach filed self-petition claiming extraordinary ability through competition victory and four regulatory criteria. The AAO found the competition award was not major or internationally recognized, and the petitioner met none of the ten regulatory criteria. Petition dismissed because petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained acclaim or top-tier field status.

Wushu athlete and instructor petitioner failed to specifically address director's findings on appeal, merely reasserting achievements without responding to deficiencies. Director rejected awards, membership, publications, exhibitions, and leading role criteria. AAO dismissed appeal summarily for failure to identify erroneous conclusions and rejected combining athletic and coaching accomplishments as impermissible.

Fencing coach self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability through six regulatory criteria. AAO found petitioner met fewer than three criteria under plain language: awards to students do not qualify, athlete membership does not satisfy coaching association requirement in plural form. Comparable evidence not available; petition dismissed.