Published AAO appeal decisions

An actor seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claimed awards, published material, judging, original contributions, exhibitions, leading roles, high salary, and commercial success. The AAO found three criteria satisfied but concluded the totality of evidence did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or placement among the very top of the field.

An architect with 20+ years experience seeks an NIW for EB-2 as advanced degree professional. He claimed his design, consulting and planning services have national importance via construction industry boost, tourism, historic revitalization, and federal initiatives. The AAO affirmed denial because his specific proposed endeavor lacks demonstrated national implications or prospective impact.

Motorcycle customizer sought EB-2 classification with NIW for exceptional ability. AAO dismissed because petitioner failed to meet three regulatory criteria for exceptional ability at time of filing; NIW analysis not reached due to threshold ineligibility.

An architect sought a national interest waiver for EB-2 classification. The AAO found she failed the first Dhanasar prong because her proposed endeavor combining healthcare facility design and hurricane-resistant solutions lacked clarity and sufficient national importance beyond serving individual clients.

Sewing professional claimed exceptional ability under six EB-2 criteria. AAO dismissed the appeal, finding she met only one criterion reliably. Because underlying EB-2 classification was not established, the national interest waiver claim was not addressed.

A costume designer for athletes and performers seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner met only one of ten evidentiary criteria (exhibitions) and failed to demonstrate the three-criteria threshold or sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Cellist seeking EB-2 NIW based on claimed prestigious status and intent to establish a quartet. Petitioner relied on prior awards, degrees, and membership to show exceptional ability. AAO affirmed dismissal, finding petitioner did not establish that endeavor has national importance; recognition was largely confined to Florida, not international.

A fashion designer and entrepreneur claimed extraordinary ability through five criteria. The AAO found only two criteria met (published material and judging), concluded she did not meet the threshold of three criteria, and found insufficient sustained acclaim for the elite classification sought.

A musician sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. The petitioner claimed exceptional ability but failed to meet three of six regulatory criteria. The AAO found membership in Brazilian Musicians Association insufficient and contributions limited to personal performing and one education tool, lacking field-wide impact.

A micropigmentation makeup artist sought extraordinary ability classification in the arts. After an earlier summary dismissal of the appeal, she filed combined motions to reopen and reconsider. The AAO dismissed them because no new fact showed the appeal had identified a specific error, and no misapplied law or policy was shown.

Self-employed photographer sought EB-2 with national interest waiver. AAO found petitioner met only one of six exceptional ability criteria (academic degree), failing to establish three required criteria. Because underlying EB-2 qualification not established, Dhanasar waiver analysis not reached.

Self-petitioning nail design artist claims extraordinary ability through international awards, published materials, judging participation, scholarly articles, and leadership role. AAO sustained appeal, finding petitioner demonstrated sustained international acclaim and expertise placing her among the small percentage at the very top of her field.

Graphic designer self-petitioner claimed national interest waiver under EB-2. AAO affirmed denial on two grounds: petitioner failed to establish equivalency to U.S. advanced degree, and proposed business endeavor lacks national importance or broader economic effects.

Vocalist and music teacher with advanced degree sought national interest waiver for endeavor of musical event management and classical music teaching. AAO affirmed underlying EB-2 eligibility but found proposed activities lacked national importance, distinguishing from STEM teaching precedent by showing no broad industry impact. Appeal dismissed.

Musician-composer claiming extraordinary ability through invention of hybrid bass guitar and music compositions. Claimed four criteria but met only published material. AAO found original contributions lacked evidence of field impact and scholarly articles failed authorship and publication requirements. Appeal dismissed because fewer than three criteria established.

Fashion model with over a decade of experience and O-1 status claimed six regulatory criteria. Director found only judging criterion satisfied. AAO affirmed that petitioner failed to meet three criteria required for extraordinary ability, lacking major awards and failing to demonstrate sufficient impact through publications, original contributions, or critical roles.

A Thai musician and musical instrument maker claimed extraordinary ability. The AAO found one criterion met: artistic display. Five other claimed criteria failed due to insufficient documentation of recognition level and national or international acclaim. The petitioner lacked evidence of sustained recognition in the field.

Pianist seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to establish either a major internationally recognized award or three alternate regulatory criteria. Evidence of local competition awards, professional memberships, and regional media appearance insufficient to demonstrate elite status.

A photographer and business owner from Brazil claimed extraordinary ability through seven criteria. The AAO found two criteria met: published material and exhibition display. However, the petitioner failed to establish three qualifying criteria and lacks sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.

Photographer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Claimed four criteria: awards, published material, exhibitions, and critical role. AAO rejected all four findings; none met regulatory requirements. No sustained acclaim established.

Fashion designer sought extraordinary ability classification claiming six criteria including awards, membership, and scholarly articles. AAO found only one criterion met (judging) and upheld dismissal. Petitioner failed to establish three-criterion threshold and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for EB-1A.

Fashion designer met only two criteria (judging, exhibitions) and failed three-criterion threshold. AAO dismissed appeal finding insufficient evidence that Mara de Oro Award or Venezuelan publications qualified as nationally or internationally recognized, and that petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim required.

Folk and classical singer from Armenia claimed eight criteria beyond those Director found met. AAO affirmed Director's finding of two criteria met but found petitioner failed to establish three criteria total required. Final merits analysis concluded no sustained national or international acclaim demonstrating top-tier status.

A fashion model from Australia sought EB-1A classification claiming ten evidentiary criteria. The AAO affirmed the service center's finding that she satisfied only one criterion (display at exhibitions). The record lacked evidence of nationally recognized awards, qualifying association membership, or the sustained national/international acclaim required for extraordinary ability status.

Comics creator and illustrator self-petitioning for EB-1A extraordinary ability claimed three criteria. AAO found one criterion met: a nationally recognized Venezuelan award for excellence in plastic arts. Published material and leading critical role claims were rejected. Appeal dismissed because only two of ten required criteria established.