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
60 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- EB-1AArts, design, architecture2019Dismissed
A master embroidery artisan claimed extraordinary ability in traditional Uzbek embroidery, alleging five criteria satisfied. The AAO upheld the Director's revocation, finding only one criterion met and rejecting the others for lack of objective evidence: no major award, unverified membership, insufficient scholarly publication, and contributions lacking demonstrated field impact.
1 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ALife sciences and medicine2019Dismissed
A research scientist in public health claiming extraordinary ability presented evidence of judging and scholarly articles. The AAO dismissed the appeal because although two criteria were met, the third claimed criterion on original contributions of major significance failed: the evaluation plan lacked evidence of pre-filing implementation or major field-wide impact.
2 of 4 criteria metRead → - O-1AEducation and academia2019Dismissed
A Chinese language teacher at a private high school sought O-1A classification for extraordinary ability in education. The petitioner claimed the beneficiary met two of eight evidentiary criteria through awards and professional memberships. The AAO found neither criterion satisfied because the awards lacked national or international recognition and the associations did not require outstanding achievement for membership.
0 of 2 criteria metRead → - EB-1ALife sciences and medicine2019Dismissed
Post-doctoral researcher in medicine sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed original contributions criterion. Insufficient evidence of major significance or field-wide impact. Appeal dismissed.
2 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athletics2019Dismissed
A jiu-jitsu coach claims extraordinary ability based on six criteria. The decision finds insufficient evidence for membership, published material, original contributions, leading role, and high salary. Comparable evidence arguments rejected. With no criteria met, extraordinary ability is not established.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - O-1ASports and athletics2019Dismissed
Dismissed · 4 criteria reviewed1 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABiotech and pharma2019Dismissed
A molecular diagnostics company employed a scientist claiming extraordinary ability in sciences. Director found four criteria met, but AAO reversed original contributions and high salary findings. With only two criteria solidly met and no showing of sustained national acclaim at field's top, appeal dismissed.
2 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1AChemistry and materials2019Dismissed
A chemical engineering research engineer sought EB-1A classification. AAO affirmed the director's finding that he met only two criteria: judging and scholarly articles. Original contributions were not shown to be major significance beyond his employer. Leading role criterion failed because criticality was limited to research group. Appeal dismissed.
2 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architecture2019Dismissed
Record label petitions for creative director as EB-1A extraordinary ability in arts. Beneficiary met two criteria (leading role, high salary) but petition failed because petitioner could not demonstrate three minimum criteria: awards were not nationally recognized, membership lacked evidence of outstanding achievement requirements, and published material lacked proper documentation.
2 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1ALife sciences and medicine2019Dismissed
Researcher in School of Medicine seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability in sciences for work on genetic mutations and microcephaly. Petitioner met two criteria (judging, scholarly articles) but failed to meet three minimum. Original contributions criterion failed because research citations and textbook inclusion were insufficient evidence of major field significance.
2 of 4 criteria metRead →
