Published AAO appeal decisions

A craftsperson from Russia sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed membership in two art unions and a display criterion. The AAO found only display satisfied; the union memberships lacked evidence that outstanding achievements were judged by recognized experts. She failed to meet the three-criterion threshold and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.

Composer and singer self-petitioner claiming extraordinary ability sought EB-1A. Claimed five criteria but did not address director's rejection on appeal, waiving the issue. Director found evidence insufficient for all claimed criteria. AAO also found material fraud: falsified award certificate and fabricated film project with falsified supporting documents. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet criteria threshold and willful misrepresentation.

Hair stylist claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO dismissed after finding only two of ten criteria met, below three-criterion threshold. Styling work lacked national or international recognition and did not evidence career of acclaimed work.

A makeup artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed six criteria on appeal but provided insufficient evidence for awards, judging, publications, salary, and membership; one criterion was abandoned. The AAO dismissed, finding petitioner did not satisfy three criteria or demonstrate extraordinary ability.

A Bangladeshi writer claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A, asserting six regulatory criteria including awards, membership, published material, judging, and exhibitions. The AAO dismissed the appeal after finding willful misrepresentation of material facts through falsified news articles and determining the petitioner did not meet the required three criteria.

A restaurant employer sponsored an executive chef with 14 years of experience and United Kingdom culinary training for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the beneficiary met only one of ten evidentiary criteria and the record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability status.

Visual artist seeking extraordinary ability classification. Director found three criteria met; AAO dismissed because petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and place among very top of field despite meeting initial evidentiary threshold.

Artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification for studio and gallery work. AAO affirmed denial, finding petitioner met only one of ten required criteria and failed to demonstrate major award or sustained national or international acclaim at top of field.

A singer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She met three initial evidentiary criteria but failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the very top of her field. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding her achievements insufficient for the high standard required.

An artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed four criteria and the Director found two met. On appeal, the AAO determined that even the two met criteria were insufficient and that the remaining claimed criteria were not established. The petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

A pastry chef self-petitioner sought EB-1A classification based on extraordinary ability. The petitioner claimed four criteria on appeal. The AAO found the petitioner failed to meet three criteria initially required and did not reach additional claimed criteria. No evidence demonstrated sustained national or international acclaim or top-of-field status.

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.

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.

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 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-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.

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.