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
5 decisions
Outcomes in these results
- Dismissed
- Remanded
- Sustained
- EB-2 NIWAgriculture and foodDec 2020Sustained
University sponsored assistant professor in agricultural soil science for national interest waiver. AAO sustained appeal, finding proposed research on greenhouse gas emissions and soil fertility meets all Dhanasar prongs and merits waiver.
3 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-2 NIWAgriculture and foodNov 2020Dismissed
Food scientist with bachelor's degree equivalent seeking NIW for food safety and production work. AAO affirmed denial because proposed work, though meritorious, lacks national importance. Impact limited to specific employers; no evidence of broader field or economic effects.
0 of 3 criteria metRead → - EB-1AAgriculture and foodApr 2020Dismissed
A chef claimed extraordinary ability, asserting on appeal that seven criteria were met. The AAO dismissed the appeal after finding that awards, membership, published material and original contributions were not satisfied, and that the record did not show sustained acclaim or a place at the top of the field.
0 of 8 criteria metRead → - EB-1AAgriculture and foodFeb 2020Dismissed
A soil scientist sought extraordinary ability classification. The service center denied the petition, finding only one of three required initial criteria met. On appeal the petitioner did not challenge any error in that denial and instead requested consideration under a different classification. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failing to identify any error.
Read → - EB-1AAgriculture and foodJan 2020Dismissed
Plant pathology researcher claimed extraordinary ability. Director found two criteria met. AAO affirmed only two criteria (judging, scholarly articles) and rejected original contributions and leading role as lacking major significance. Appeal dismissed for failure to satisfy three criteria.
2 of 5 criteria metRead →
