Published AAO appeal decisions

A junior cell biology researcher and faculty member sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming awards, membership, contributions and scholarly articles. The AAO found the contributions and articles criteria carried more weight than the director allowed, but rejected awards and membership. Overall evidence did not show sustained acclaim at the top of the field, so the appeal was dismissed.

The petitioner is a cell biology researcher seeking extraordinary ability classification in the sciences. Several criteria were claimed, many only for the first time on appeal and without support. The AAO dismissed the appeal because no major award or three criteria were shown, and sustained acclaim was not established.

Self-petitioner in sports sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed receipt of lesser awards and association membership. AAO found petitioner failed to meet criteria and provided insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or intent to continue in field.

Self-petitioner, a filmmaker, sought EB-1A extraordinary ability in the arts. Claimed association membership and published material through documentary evidence. AAO found membership criterion unmet, translations improper, and no evidence of sustained post-student success establishing top-level field position.

Employer petitioned for researcher in sciences for EB-1A extraordinary ability. Claimed three regulatory criteria covering awards, membership, and published material. AAO found beneficiary failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement at very top of research field.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed at least three regulatory criteria. AAO found petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim through awards, membership, or published material evidence, and did not establish eligibility as extraordinary ability alien.

Self-petitioner initially approved for EB-1A extraordinary ability, then revocation proceeding initiated. Met awards criterion but failed membership and published material criteria. AAO sustained revocation, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim at very top of field.

Pathologist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed trainee travel award and trainee membership criteria. AAO found trainee status and funding for conference travel insufficient to demonstrate excellence or top-tier recognition in the field.

A dermatologist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed membership, published material, judging, scholarly articles, and critical role. The AAO found none met the standard for sustained national or international acclaim at the field's very top, dismissing the appeal.

A self-petitioner in financial investment sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed multiple criteria but provided insufficient evidence. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field, and evidence was dated nearly a decade before filing.

An EB-1A petitioner (karate instructor or referee) claimed to meet at least three criteria. The AAO found awards and membership criteria unmet due to insufficient evidence of their requirements and significance. Overall evidence did not show sustained acclaim placing petitioner among the very top.

An EB-1A petitioner claimed to meet at least three criteria for extraordinary ability. The AAO found the petitioner failed to meet awards, membership, and published material criteria. Evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level of the field.

A music manager sought EB-1A classification claiming to meet three criteria. The AAO corrected the director's field characterization but found awards, membership, and leading role criteria unmet. Evidence demonstrated talent but not sustained acclaim placing the petitioner among the very top.

Petitioner sought EB-1A classification. Claimed awards, membership, and published material criteria. AAO found award was local not national; association does not require outstanding achievement; online articles lack evidence of major media status. Overall record fails to demonstrate sustained acclaim at very top level.

A designer claimed extraordinary ability through professional membership, published materials, and exhibition participation. The AAO found membership requirements did not reflect outstanding achievement, published materials lacked documentation in major venues, and exhibition claims were unsupported by evidence. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet top-tier acclaim.

Scientist claimed extraordinary ability via three criteria: awards, membership, and judging. AAO found membership ineligible due to timing and awards insufficient, declined separate judging analysis, and concluded petitioner showed no sustained national or international acclaim at field's highest level.

An artist with counsel sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Awards did not meet standards; membership organizations lacked outstanding achievement requirements; publications were not about the artist; exhibitions were sporadic and early-dated. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim at the highest level.

An employer sponsored a beneficiary for EB-1A extraordinary ability in music education. The beneficiary did not meet multiple criteria; letters and certificates were insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim at the highest level. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the beneficiary had not distinguished herself above others nationally or internationally.

Professional cyclist and coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO found petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim; regional race wins and local team memberships insufficient to show extraordinary ability at the very top of the field.

Petitioner in sciences sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director denied for lack of sustained national or international acclaim. AAO found petitioner met at least three regulatory criteria and that totality of evidence established sustained national acclaim and extraordinary ability warranting approval.

Violin performer and teacher claimed three criteria: awards, membership, and published material. The AAO found the awards insufficient because they were institution-limited or decade-old, memberships did not require outstanding achievement, and articles were not primarily about the petitioner or in major media. Overall, evidence showed talent but not sustained national or international acclaim at the top of the field.

Social worker and women's rights advocate claimed awards, membership, published material, and high salary criteria. The AAO rejected awards as decade-old and organizationally-based, membership as lacking outstanding achievement requirements, articles as incompletely translated, and salary as not clearly tied to social work. Evidence insufficient for sustained national or international acclaim.

A wrestler sought extraordinary ability classification. The AAO reviewed six criteria but found no evidence supporting any. Petitioner submitted no documentation of awards, membership, publications, or leadership roles. Evidence failed to demonstrate sustained national acclaim or that petitioner stood among the very top in the field.

A dancer and choreographer sought extraordinary ability classification. She claimed three criteria: awards, membership, and published materials. The AAO found none met: youth awards do not show top-field status, association membership criteria unproven, and materials lacked major media publication. Overall evidence showed talent but insufficient sustained acclaim.

A runner petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim. Evidence of awards and team selections did not meet the criteria when evaluated for their indicative value of sustained acclaim at the highest level.