Published AAO appeal decisions

A writer and poet sought extraordinary ability classification. He claimed awards, membership, published material, and judging experience. The AAO found awards showed only institutional recognition, membership criteria unmet, published articles lacked required translations and major publication venue, and judging did not demonstrate top-tier acclaim. Appeal dismissed.

A research scientist sought extraordinary ability classification. He claimed awards, membership, published material, and judging experience. The AAO found the research grant primarily attributed to principal investigators, not the petitioner; membership criteria unmet; publications not primarily about petitioner and lacking author attribution; and judging did not establish top-tier acclaim. Appeal dismissed.

Acrobatic performer sought EB-1A classification through awards, publications, and contributions. AAO found petitioner is accomplished but lacks sustained national or international acclaim at very top level, with awards stale, no recent performances documented, and no commercial success demonstrated.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A classification based on awards, memberships, and published material. AAO found all evidence reflected only local recognition and did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Amateur natural bodybuilder seeks EB-1A. Decision holds petitioner failed to establish extraordinary ability despite claiming five criteria met. Awards from amateur competitions not nationally or internationally recognized; published article alone insufficient; membership based on local evaluation only. Amateur competition level inconsistent with very top of field.

Table tennis competitor seeks EB-1A. Decision holds petitioner failed to meet three required criteria. Old awards reflect local recognition only; single newspaper article insufficient for published material criterion; no judging evidence provided. No sustained national or international acclaim established.

Petitioner claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. AAO held petitioner failed to meet three regulatory criteria and dismissed appeal with finding of fraud because petitioner knowingly submitted falsified documents material to eligibility determination.

A stage show director in Philippines seeking EB-1A claimed three criteria met. The AAO rejected the awards, published material, and exhibitions criteria as failing to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim, and dismissed the appeal because the evidence did not establish extraordinary ability.

Research scientist in malaria and life sciences claimed extraordinary ability based on awards, publications, peer review, and contributions. AAO affirmed denial, finding petitioner had not established sustained national or international acclaim or place among small percentage at top of field despite showing research talent.

A medical scientist's EB-1A petition was initially approved then revoked by California Service Center. AAO upheld revocation, finding petitioner failed to satisfy three regulatory criteria and lacked sustained acclaim placing him at the top of his scientific field.

Research scientist in molecular biology claimed extraordinary ability in sciences. Submitted evidence of patents, scholarly articles, and published materials. AAO found two criteria satisfied but three required; evidence showed talent and potential but not sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level. Appeal dismissed.

A business researcher petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability in business. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding petitioner met only two required criteria; evidence of talent insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement at the very top of the field.

Gladiator athlete sought extraordinary ability classification. AAO upheld denial finding insufficient primary evidence of awards, non-qualifying membership, and articles lacking national or international reach; expert letter opinions cannot form cornerstone of claim.

Female vocalist in Argentina sought extraordinary ability based on international song festival award and published materials. AAO dismissed finding no primary award evidence, articles lacking national reach, and insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim at top level.

Fine artist petitioned for extraordinary ability classification claiming awards, judging, and published material. AAO found awards lacked national recognition, judging criterion unmet as residencies are not prizes, and publications in small media insufficient. Evidence did not demonstrate sustained acclaim at very top national or international level.

Pianist holding O-1 visa sought EB-1A classification. Evidence included local performances and newspaper reviews. AAO found standards dramatically different between O-1 and EB-1A, dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to meet three criteria or show sustained acclaim at very top level.

Software engineer petitioner claimed four criteria for extraordinary ability classification. AAO found the awards criterion met but withdrawn published material and original contributions criteria as not meeting acclaim standard. Scholarly articles criterion also failed. Overall, evidence insufficient to establish sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.

Oil painter filed EB-1A petition with evidence of exhibitions in multiple countries. AAO found exhibitions criterion met but rejected awards, membership, and publications as lacking national or international recognition. Overall evidence insufficient to establish extraordinary ability at field's apex.

Artist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability in the arts. Petitioner submitted evidence relating to awards, publications, scholarly articles, leading role, and commercial success criteria. AAO held none met; no sustained acclaim demonstrated and record contained no evidence of sustained acclaim after U.S. entry.

Professional musician, composer and producer self-petitioner sought EB-1A classification. Claimed awards, membership, published material, and critical role criteria. AAO affirmed dismissal finding petitioner failed to substantiate any criteria adequately and did not meet requirement of three satisfied criteria.

Research scientist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in sciences. Claimed awards, membership, published material, judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles. AAO found only scholarly articles criterion met; evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national acclaim or place among top percentile required for final merits step.

An artist sought extraordinary ability based on awards, board membership, published material, and exhibitions. The AAO found fraudulent submissions of three articles and that remaining evidence failed to meet three criteria. Appeal dismissed with fraud finding.

Self-represented artist claimed extraordinary ability through awards, membership, publications, and exhibitions. The AAO found awards were local or provincial, publications insufficient, and exhibitions not at significant venues. Petition dismissed with fraud finding for misrepresenting another individual's achievements.

Dermatologist and ophthalmologist researcher claimed extraordinary ability through five criteria including publications and original contributions to treatment innovations. AAO found only one criterion met and held evidence insufficient for sustained acclaim, dismissing petition.

Performing artist in Chinese opera sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Claimed awards, membership, and published material. AAO rejected all criteria due to youth awards, provincial recognition, missing documentation, and discrepancies in award dates; dismissed appeal for failure to meet three-criterion threshold.