Published AAO appeal decisions

A poet seeks EB-1A as an alien of extraordinary ability in the arts. The petitioner claimed awards, membership, published material, and scholarly articles. The AAO affirmed dismissal because the petitioner failed to establish any criterion and showed only talent, not sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level.

A research scientist claims EB-1A extraordinary ability in the sciences. The petitioner asserted awards, membership, publications, original contributions, scholarly articles, leading role, and salary criteria. The AAO affirmed denial because none demonstrated the sustained national or international acclaim required to show she reached the very top of her field.

Counsel represented Chinese Peking Opera actor claiming extraordinary ability. Failed to meet three required criteria: awards lacked official documentation, membership was local-level only, and critical role unproven. Additionally, no evidence of continued work in expertise area or prospective employment plans required by regulation.

A power lifter from Uruguay seeks EB-1A classification as a personal trainer. The petitioner claimed awards, membership, published material, judging, and leading role. The AAO affirmed dismissal because the petitioner met none of the three criteria required and showed no sustained national or international acclaim in the claimed field.

IT educator and consultant seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner submitted certificates, CompTIA membership, articles, recommendation letters, and commercial success evidence. AAO found none met regulatory criteria; evidence demonstrated commendable local contributions but no sustained national or international acclaim at top of field.

Taekwondo instructor beneficiary sought O-1A nonimmigrant visa for extraordinary ability in athletics. Petitioner claimed three criteria: awards, association membership, and judging experience. AAO dismissed, finding awards were regional not national, membership claim unsubstantiated, and judging criterion unmet; fewer than three criteria satisfied.

Cook sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed awards, membership, judging experience, and exhibitions. AAO found early awards lacked sustained acclaim, membership and judging criteria not met, and exhibitions not demonstrated at exclusive national venues. Record also lacked evidence of intent to continue work in United States.

Performing artist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner submitted awards, association memberships, and performance evidence. AAO found no criteria met; awards lacked national documentation, memberships did not show outstanding achievement, performances were not centerpiece of major productions, and no evidence of intent to continue work in United States.

CEO claiming extraordinary ability in business submitted evidence of local company rankings, association membership, software development, and executive compensation. AAO found only one criterion met, concluding the applicant showed talent but lacked sustained national or international acclaim required for top-tier classification.

A Chinese acrobat claiming extraordinary ability in athletics and arts submitted evidence of local awards, association membership, and performances. AAO found no criterion met, determining awards lacked national or international recognition and membership did not require outstanding achievement.

An assistant research professor claiming extraordinary ability in sciences submitted evidence of research grants, IEEE membership, and peer review duties. AAO found only one criterion minimally met and dismissed appeal, concluding applicant showed talent but lacked sustained top-tier national or international acclaim.

Figure skater and coach self-petitioner sought EB-1A as athlete with extraordinary ability. Claimed awards and national team membership criteria. AAO affirmed director's finding that petitioner failed to establish top-level preeminence as either competitor or coach and did not meet three required criteria.

A psychiatrist self-petitioner claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability based on awards, memberships, certifications, and judging experience. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding he did not meet at least three criteria because evidence showed routine occupational duties rather than national or international acclaim at the very top.

A researcher counsel-represented beneficiary claimed EB-1A based on awards, membership, and publications. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding she failed to demonstrate at least three criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim placing her at the very top of her field.

A cook petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claiming sustained national or international acclaim. The AAO found the petitioner failed to meet at least three regulatory criteria, with no major international award, no qualifying memberships, and no evidence of regular display at exclusive venues. Appeal dismissed.

A statistician sought EB-1A classification, claiming prizes, memberships, published material, and citations of scholarly work. The AAO found student-only prizes and fee-based memberships insufficient, and held the citation record did not fit the contributions criterion. Overall, the evidence showed talent but not sustained acclaim at the top, so the appeal was dismissed.

Tile and stone fabricator-installer seeking EB-1A classification. Self-represented petitioner claimed beneficiary reached level to work unsupervised and offered photographs. AAO found no evidence meeting any of ten regulatory criteria and no documentation of sustained national or international acclaim; petition dismissed.

Artist (calligrapher-graphic artist) seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Self-represented petitioner submitted certificates, membership evidence, article, and videotape. AAO found evidence insufficient for any criterion and that petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim at very top level; petition dismissed.

Hair stylist claiming extraordinary ability based on South American awards and professional positions. AAO held awards insufficient: insufficient documentation and no sustained acclaim for ten years before filing. Position as judge and television work held too long ago. No evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for EB-1A.

Self-petitioner singer claimed extraordinary ability based on one 1986 award, Academy membership, published material, and original contributions. AAO found the award uncorroborated, career limited to 1986–1988, no sustained acclaim demonstrated, and evidence insufficient to show top-tier achievement.

Horticulture artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Failed to establish three required criteria: awards lacked major international recognition, membership requirements unclear, exhibitions lacking specificity. No evidence of sustained national acclaim or elite status. Also lacked required evidence of intent to continue work in United States.

Self-represented musical drama performer claimed extraordinary ability under membership, high salary, and commercial success criteria. AAO found no criterion satisfied: membership criterion inappropriate for performing artists, no comparative salary evidence, and photographs do not demonstrate commercial success.

Self-petitioner management scientist claimed extraordinary ability via award, membership, and published material. AAO found Second-Class award insufficient due to incomplete documentation, no evidence of outstanding-achievement membership requirement, and Chinese-language articles do not constitute major media.

Traditional Indian tabla musician sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO found no criteria met: awards lack documented significance, memberships do not require outstanding achievement, no national media coverage, insufficient documentation of influence or acclaim, and no evidence of top national performances or commercial success.

Scientist in life sciences sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed to meet six criteria but the AAO found none met. Awards lacked significance, membership criteria not satisfied, citations insufficient, peer review routine, original contributions undemonstrated, and scholarship evidence post-dated filing. Appeal dismissed.