Published AAO appeal decisions

An athlete in ultramarathon racing claimed extraordinary ability and submitted evidence of race placements, national team membership, published articles, and judging. The AAO found races were local only, national team membership lacked documentation of selection standards, articles were not shown to be about the petitioner in major media, and judging evidence was insufficient. Petitioner met fewer than three criteria.

A vocalist claimed extraordinary ability and submitted an award, a published article, and evidence of performances. The AAO found the award lacked national or international prominence, the published material was not primarily about the petitioner and lacked a publication date, and performances alone did not demonstrate commercial success. The petitioner met fewer than three criteria and failed to show sustained national or international acclaim.

Aerospace engineer claimed extraordinary ability in sciences. Submitted evidence of scholarship award, professional membership, authored works, publications, organizational role, and salary. AAO found petitioner failed to meet three required criteria; scholarship had multiple winners, membership lacked outstanding achievement requirement, scholarly work not documented, salary not shown as high. Appeal dismissed.

Self-petitioner religious educator sought extraordinary ability classification. Submitted correspondence from associates attesting to work but lacked documentary evidence meeting regulatory criteria. AAO found letters of support insufficient substitute for specific regulatory documentation such as awards, published material, or high salary, and dismissed for failure to meet three criteria.

Artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed awards, membership, and published materials criteria. AAO found awards were local, not national or international; membership criteria not met; biographical notices did not satisfy published materials requirement; overall evidence insufficient for sustained top-level acclaim.

A self-represented scholar in Buddhist and philosophical studies sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming awards, memberships, published material, judging and a leading role. The AAO agreed with the director that none of five criteria was met, since awards and memberships were not selective and the publication was self-founded, so acclaim was not shown.

Competitive bodybuilder sought extraordinary ability classification. AAO found claimant failed awards, membership, published material, and original contributions criteria. Evidence demonstrated athletic talent but not sustained national or international acclaim above the small percentage at the very top of the field.

A self-represented artist sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming awards, membership, published material, exhibitions, a leading role and high salary. The AAO dismissed the appeal because no major award or three criteria were shown, and also found no evidence of intent to continue working in the United States.

Fashion designer from China sought EB-1A classification based on achievements during 1990s and after 2000 entry. AAO found petitioner failed to meet three criteria with documentary evidence and lacked sustained acclaim within United States. Appeal dismissed.

Self-represented Georgian folk music performer and teacher claims extraordinary ability but failed to specify which criteria met. AAO found no awards evidence, inadequate published material, insufficient judging, weak original contributions, no exclusive exhibitions, unexceptional salary, and no commercial success documentation. Overall evidence showed talent but not sustained top-tier acclaim.

Counsel-represented economist formerly employed by Canadian Department of Finance claims extraordinary ability through awards, publications, critical role, and salary. AAO found witness letters insufficient primary evidence, publications not in major media, role subordinate, and salary unexceptional. Overall evidence failed to demonstrate top-tier status.

Distance runner petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability in athletics. Claimed awards, team membership, published material, and judging. AAO found race participation local only, team membership criteria unmet, articles not featured or in major media, judging unsubstantiated. Appeal dismissed.

Research associate in environmental science filed for EB-1A extraordinary ability, claiming one award and publication record. AAO found one award criterion minimally met but rejected five other criteria as lacking national or international significance. Overall evidence insufficient to establish elite status.

Dance instructor and competitive dancer self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. AAO found evidence insufficient: awards from amateur competitions lack national recognition, coached dancers won only regional competitions, and published material was limited to local interviews. Appeal dismissed.

Performer in performing arts sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO found only one criterion met (leading critical role), falling short of three required. Awards lacked documentation, salary and commercial success unproven, published material lacking. Appeal dismissed.

A dance studio employer petitions for EB-1A classification of a beneficiary as extraordinary ability in the arts. The beneficiary claimed awards, published material, and leading role as dancer and coach. The AAO affirmed dismissal because the beneficiary met no criteria and showed insufficient sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level.

Former rhythmic gymnast seeking EB-1A as coach. Petitioner claimed awards and published materials criteria. AAO held insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim as coach rather than retired athlete; coaching achievements not documented at national or international level.

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.

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.

Oil painter from China sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification based on exhibition awards, publication, judging role, and sales. AAO dismissed appeal, finding awards and exhibitions lacked sustained national acclaim, documentation was deficient, and evidence did not show sustained recognition at the very top of the 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.

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.

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 physicist counsel-represented beneficiary claimed EB-1A based on publications, judging, and original contributions. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding only the scholarly articles criterion met and no evidence of sustained national or international acclaim placing him at the very top of his field.