Published AAO appeal decisions

Artist's initially approved I-140 petition was revoked after notice of intent to revoke. Director found petitioner failed to establish extraordinary ability through documentary evidence under regulatory criteria. Petitioner on appeal failed to identify specific erroneous conclusions and did not submit promised supplemental evidence. Appeal summarily dismissed.

Nonprofit director petitioner sought extraordinary ability classification for beneficiary. Beneficiary's acclaim in nonprofit direction and association with musical figures was claimed but not adequately documented under regulatory criteria. AAO upheld director's denial because petitioner failed to establish three qualifying evidentiary categories.

Musician-petitioner claimed four evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. The AAO found petitioner did not meet awards (World Youth Choir participation insufficient), membership (employment-based only), or original contributions (institutional level only). Failure to submit three qualifying categories and lack of sustained national or international acclaim led to dismissal.

Self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability as artist. AAO affirmed director's denial finding insufficient evidence of nationally or internationally recognized prizes or awards. Petitioner listed regional awards lacking required national or international recognition; translations deficient.

A music composer and producer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed four of ten regulatory criteria but submitted qualifying evidence under fewer than three. The AAO upheld the director's denial, finding the petitioner failed to meet the threshold requirement of three types of evidence and therefore could not establish sustained national or international acclaim.

Culinary artist specializing in Peruvian cuisine claiming extraordinary ability. Petitioner submitted single first-place award. AAO held award lacked national or international recognition and regulation requires multiple awards. Final merits determination found insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim.

Artist petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director denied, finding petitioner met two of ten criteria but lacked sustained acclaim and top-tier status. AAO summarily dismissed appeal because petitioner failed to identify specific errors in director's decision or address deficiencies in documentary evidence.

A writer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification and, without counsel, appealed the service center denial. The appeal form promised a brief within 30 days, but nothing was filed in about six months. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because it identified no specific error of law or fact.

A musician claimed extraordinary ability in EB-1A, presenting evidence of awards and artistic exhibitions. AAO found prizes not nationally or internationally recognized and exhibitions criterion inapplicable to music. Appeal dismissed for failing to meet three regulatory criteria.

A composer in music claimed extraordinary ability through awards, judging, original contributions, and exhibitions. AAO analyzed only awards criterion and found insufficient evidence of national or international recognition. Appeal dismissed for failing to establish three qualifying criteria.

A tabla performer and teacher in Indian classical music sought extraordinary ability classification. AAO found claimed scholarship award lacked documentary evidence of national or international recognition. Appeal dismissed; petitioner failed to establish three required criteria.

A cultural dancer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed awards, membership, published material, original contributions, exhibitions, and leading role. The AAO affirmed that two criteria were met but found insufficient evidence of major contributions or qualifying exhibitions, and dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim.

Musical artist claimed extraordinary ability through awards and other criteria. AAO held awards criterion not met and found petitioner submitted qualifying evidence under fewer than three regulatory categories, preventing extraordinary ability classification.

Performance artist claimed published material, artistic display, and leading role criteria. AAO found published material and exhibitions criteria not met by plain language standards. Only two criteria addressed; three required. Appeal dismissed without final merits analysis.

Professional musician and composer sought EB-1A classification claiming three regulatory criteria: nationally recognized awards, published material about him, and scholarly articles. The AAO found the awards lacked national or international recognition beyond local organizations and the published material did not meet documentation requirements regarding dates, author attribution, and translations. Appeal dismissed.

Visual artist petitioner claimed four criteria for extraordinary ability. AAO found awards not nationally or internationally recognized, membership based on employment not achievement, published material lacking proper documentation, and role not critical to organizational success. Appeal dismissed.

A self-petitioner ballroom dancer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed awards, association membership, judging experience, and original contributions. AAO found awards lacked national recognition, membership criteria unmet, judging claim abandoned, and contributions inadequately documented. Appeal dismissed.

Master hair designer's petitioner claimed at least three regulatory criteria for EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO held petitioner failed to provide required certified translations of award documents and did not meet the threshold of three qualifying evidentiary categories, dismissing the petition.

Photographer EB-1A petitioner claimed awards, membership, judging, and published material criteria. AAO rejected awards as institution-specific; membership as single association lacking expert review boards; judging as abandoned; and publications as insufficient. No sustained acclaim shown. Appeal dismissed.

Dance instructor or choreographer petitioner claimed multiple EB-1A criteria but met only awards criterion. AAO applied Kazarian two-step test: counted evidence types and found fewer than three qualifying criteria met. Petitioner's ambiguous career focus between dance competition and instruction undermined claim. Appeal dismissed.

Performing artist petitioner claimed ten EB-1A criteria including original contributions, exhibitions, and commercial success in performing arts. AAO found petitioner meets none of the ten regulatory criteria and therefore lacks sustained national or international acclaim necessary for extraordinary ability classification. Appeal dismissed.

Dance competitor and coach petitioner claimed extraordinary ability. Director found only awards criterion met. AAO upheld awards, upgraded judging to met, but found published material inadequate. With only two qualifying criteria, petition failed threshold requirement of three types of evidence for extraordinary ability classification.

Petitioner claimed extraordinary ability and relied on lesser prizes or awards criterion. AAO found petitioner did not submit qualifying evidence under at least three criteria and evidence demonstrated talent but not sustained national or international acclaim. Appeal dismissed.