AAO Decisions Explorer · Free
Published AAO appeal decisions
Search the decisions the Administrative Appeals Office has published, narrow them by visa, criterion, field and year, and read our summary of each one with a link to the official PDF.

Decisions in the library
6,586
6,586 classified
Visa types
3
Years covered
2005-2026
Latest decision
Aug 31, 2026
Filters
6 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- EB-1AChemistry and materialsAug 2021Dismissed
A research scientist in chemistry sought extraordinary ability classification. The service center accepted only the scholarly articles criterion. On appeal he claimed three more, covering published material, original contributions and leading role. The AAO dismissed, finding the evidence insufficient for three criteria and not showing sustained acclaim or top-of-field standing.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AChemistry and materialsJun 2021Dismissed
Environmental and chemical/petroleum engineer self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability based on scholarly articles, judging, and original contributions of major significance. AAO found only two criteria met; original contributions lacked evidence of major significance or widespread impact. Appeal dismissed as petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.
2 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AChemistry and materialsMay 2021Dismissed
A postdoctoral environmental chemistry researcher satisfied three criteria: judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles. However, on final merits analysis, the AAO found the record lacked evidence of sustained acclaim, exceptional demand, or consistent high citations required for extraordinary ability.
3 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AChemistry and materialsMay 2021Dismissed
Chemical engineer with product development work claimed four criteria: published material, judging, scholarly articles, and original contributions. AAO found three criteria met but on final merits determined evidence insufficient to show sustained national or international acclaim at top of field.
3 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AChemistry and materialsFeb 2021Dismissed
A chemistry researcher self-petitioned for extraordinary ability. Claimed three criteria: judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles. AAO affirmed two criteria met (judging and scholarly articles) but found original contributions lacked major significance. No evidence of postdoctoral training demand or top-field recognition. Appeal dismissed.
2 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AChemistry and materials2021Dismissed
A postdoctoral researcher in computational chemistry sought EB-1A classification. The AAO found he satisfied three initial criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and original contributions. However, the final merits determination concluded he lacked the sustained national or international acclaim required, despite recognizable contributions early in his career.
3 of 4 criteria metRead →
