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
164 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- EB-1AMechanical and aerospace engineeringMar 2025Dismissed
Drilling engineer and entrepreneur sought extraordinary ability classification. Claimed five criteria including awards, published material, original contributions, leading role, and high salary. AAO affirmed denial, finding awards lacked recognition, article was promotional, and salary claims ignored remuneration requirement. Overall work did not demonstrate sustained national acclaim at extraordinary ability level.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEducation and academiaMar 2025Dismissed
A rabbi and historian sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed four criteria but met none. The AAO found published material did not appear in required outlets and educational certifications do not constitute prizes for excellence. The petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFinance and economicsMar 2025Dismissed
A chief financial officer seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claimed five criteria. The AAO found she satisfied only the leading critical role criterion but failed to meet membership, published material, and high salary criteria. Without three criteria met, final merits determination was not reached. Appeal dismissed.
1 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementFeb 2025Dismissed
Business manager specializing in supply chain management and strategic purchasing sought EB-1A classification. Director found one criterion met; AAO withdrew this finding. Petitioner failed to establish three required criteria: published materials concerned employer not petitioner; support letters for original contributions lacked detail and corroboration; record showed no sustained acclaim at top of field. Dismissed.
0 of 5 criteria metRead → - O-1ASports and athleticsFeb 2025Dismissed
Dismissed · 5 criteria reviewed1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureFeb 2025Dismissed
Cinematographer from Italy sought EB-1A for short films and music videos. AAO upheld denial: satisfied only two of ten criteria (judging and exhibitions). Published material claim rejected; comparable evidence for critical role rejected. Insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for top-tier classification.
1 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ALife sciences and medicineFeb 2025Sustained
A geoscientist and volcanology researcher pursuing doctoral degrees seeks extraordinary ability classification. The AAO sustained the appeal, finding the petitioner met five initial criteria and demonstrating through aggregate evidence sustained national or international acclaim, field recognition, and placement among the very top of the volcanology field.
6 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementFeb 2025Dismissed
An international supply chain specialist sought EB-1A classification as extraordinary ability. The AAO confirmed three criteria were satisfied but found the final merits analysis did not support extraordinary ability. The petitioner lacked sufficient documentation of national or international acclaim and top-tier status in the field.
1 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athleticsFeb 2025Dismissed
A tennis player sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification with two initial criteria met. She claimed membership in national team and leadership role on university team. The AAO affirmed denials on both: national team membership lacks expert judgment; university team lacks distinguished reputation. Only two criteria met; three required minimum.
2 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIFeb 2025Dismissed
Senior security engineer claiming extraordinary ability in IT security. Petitioner claimed seven criteria but satisfied only two: judging and high salary. AAO dismissed appeal, finding insufficient evidence of national or international recognition, outstanding achievements through memberships, or published materials meeting regulatory standards. Record lacks evidence of sustained acclaim placing petitioner at field's top.
2 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureFeb 2025Dismissed
A pianist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed three criteria including published material, critical role, and scholarly articles. The AAO affirmed dismissal, finding published material unsubstantiated due to missing author credits and circulation data, critical role unsupported by vague testimonials, and scholarly articles claimed too late. Overall acclaim insufficient.
0 of 4 criteria metRead → - EB-1ALaw, policy, social scienceFeb 2025Dismissed
Lawyer and legal entrepreneur self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed six criteria including awards, membership, publications, contributions, roles, and salary. AAO dismissed, finding petitioner met none of the criteria; director's analysis was thorough and unanswered on appeal.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ALife sciences and medicineFeb 2025Dismissed
Biomedical researcher seeks EB-1A classification in sciences. Petitioner claimed at least three criteria including awards and membership. AAO found two criteria met by service center but affirmed neither award criterion nor membership was properly established, and concluded no sustained acclaim or top-tier recognition demonstrated.
0 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIFeb 2025Dismissed
Software developer and entrepreneur claiming extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Met three initial criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and leading role. AAO dismissed appeal, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or that petitioner ranks among small percentage at field's top.
3 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementFeb 2025Dismissed
A business consultant and executive sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding she satisfied only two of ten criteria. Evidence relied on letters without corroboration, and prominence in the field was not demonstrated beyond an earlier period.
2 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AMarketing, media, communicationsFeb 2025Dismissed
Marketing executive filed EB-1A petition; dismissed prior appeal. Motion presented new evidence on awards, published material, and judging criteria. AAO held new evidence insufficient; petitioner meets only one criterion, below three-criterion threshold.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureJan 2025Dismissed
Artisan in traditional Uzbek metal embossing sought EB-1A. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner abandoned challenge to misrepresentation finding regarding altered magazine publication and failed to adequately address all adverse factors in director's denial notice.
0 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AComputer science and AIJan 2025Dismissed
A gaming electronics company sought extraordinary ability classification for a foreign game design lead, claiming five criteria. The AAO found two criteria met (leading role and high salary) but rejected awards and published material claims and found insufficient sustained individual acclaim, dismissing the appeal for failing the three-criterion threshold.
2 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFilm, music, performing artsJan 2025Dismissed
A music composer sought extraordinary ability classification. The service center accepted published material and leading or critical role, and the appeal contested awards and display of work. The AAO dismissed it because only two criteria were met, fewer than the three needed, and reserved the final merits determination.
2 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEntrepreneurshipJan 2025Dismissed
Social entrepreneur assisting artisans in Pakistan seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed five evidentiary criteria but met only one. AAO held petitioner did not satisfy minimum three criteria required; appeal dismissed without final merits determination.
0 of 6 criteria metRead → - EB-1ABusiness and managementJan 2025Dismissed
Entrepreneur in business and immigration investment sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed six criteria including published material, original contributions, and scholarly articles. AAO found published material deficient due to missing metadata and post-filing dates, original contributions lacked evidence of major field significance, and petition failed to meet three-criterion threshold for final merits analysis.
0 of 7 criteria metRead → - EB-1ASports and athleticsJan 2025Dismissed
Judo coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed, finding no major award, only one of five claimed criteria met, and insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim placing petitioner in top of field.
1 of 5 criteria metRead → - EB-1AArts, design, architectureJan 2025Dismissed
A singer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding no one-time major international award and only two criteria arguably satisfied (awards and published material); documents lacked proper authentication and evidence did not show national or international recognition required for sustained acclaim.
0 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AEducation and academiaJan 2025Dismissed
A business and social psychology researcher sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO found he did not receive a major award and met only two of ten criteria, not the required three. Letters of recommendation and citation records did not establish major significance of contributions. Appeal dismissed.
2 of 11 criteria metRead → - EB-1AFilm, music, performing artsJan 2025Dismissed
Kazakh actress claimed seven EB-1A criteria. AAO found awards and membership criteria not met; other claimed criteria were not analyzed. Overall, petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or position at top of acting field required for extraordinary ability classification.
0 of 8 criteria metRead →
