Published AAO appeal decisions

A company petitioned for EB-1A classification for its co-founder and head of product in technology. The service center found two criteria met: leading role and high salary. The AAO affirmed denial because the petitioner failed to establish three required criteria; awards, membership, published material, and scholarship claims all fell short of regulatory standards.

A digital health communications influencer and public health educator sought EB-1A classification. The service center found two criteria met; the AAO on appeal reconsidered and found insufficient evidence for the high salary criterion, leaving petitioner below the three-criterion threshold.

An AI researcher with a Ph.D. in theoretical physics sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She met initial evidence requirements in three criteria but failed the original contributions prong on closer review; citations alone were insufficient proof of major significance. The AAO found the record lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for the visa.

AI engineer self-petitioner sought NIW based on broad plans to advance AI and exponential technologies for healthcare and general use. AAO found no specific proposed endeavor: petitioner discussed general intentions without particularizing data-driven tools, efficiency gains, or LLM inference work. Appeal dismissed; favorable prong determinations withdrawn without specific endeavor.

A digital transformation architect satisfied three initial criteria but failed the final merits test. AAO found his Salesforce certification, recent judging, publications, and employment did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or placement among the very top of the field required for extraordinary ability.

Software development engineer in test claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A, citing five criteria. AAO found he met judging and high salary criteria but abandoned other claims on appeal. Two criteria insufficient; record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability classification.

Research engineer seeks NIW under EB-2 to conduct research in vehicle safety, renewable energy, and data centers. AAO dismissed, finding substantial merit but insufficient evidence of national importance; research activities limited to employer and clients without demonstrated broader implications.

Technology company petitioned for CTO classified as extraordinary ability in technology entrepreneurship. SCOPS found two criteria met; AAO found judging criterion also satisfied. Decision remanded for final merits determination on sustained acclaim and top percentile status after establishing three evidentiary criteria.

IT consultant sought EB-2 with national interest waiver claiming exceptional ability. AAO affirmed second denial after remand, finding only one of six exceptional ability criteria met. National importance not established for proposed IT consulting endeavor.

Founder and CEO of an AI platform company sought EB-1A classification. Petitioner claimed seven evidentiary criteria and sustained acclaim. AAO affirmed SCOPS finding that only judging criterion was met. Venture capital funding, fellowship participation, and other claims failed because they lacked necessary recognition or expert evaluation. Appeal dismissed.

Computer science PhD studying efficient AI model deployment met first Dhanasar prong on substantial merit and national importance. However, AAO found insufficient evidence of being well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor through citations, letters, and research record. Third prong not reached. Appeal dismissed.

A founder and CEO of an AI auditing platform startup seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed six criteria; SCOPS found two met. AAO withdrew and remanded, finding the leading/critical role criterion additionally satisfied, but remanded for final merits determination on whether the evidence shows sustained national or international acclaim and place among the very top.

A technical program manager claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A, meeting two of ten criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding insufficient evidence of extraordinary ability. Petitioner satisfied judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed to demonstrate that his original contributions had major significance or that he had national or international acclaim.

A machine learning engineer with a master's degree sought EB-2 NIW for research into autonomous driving and robotics systems. The AAO confirmed he met the advanced degree requirement and that his endeavor had substantial merit, but rejected the petition because his proposed research lacked sufficient evidence of national importance under Dhanasar's first prong.

Computer scientist with master's degree in electrical engineering sought EB-2 NIW for individual research optimizing spectrum sensing in wireless networks. AAO found endeavor has substantial merit but lacks national importance. Petitioner failed to show individual research would impact field on scale commensurate with national importance despite field relevance.

Technology entrepreneur and CEO claims extraordinary ability in AI systems and industrial devices. Petitioner satisfied two criteria (scholarly articles, critical role) but failed to meet three required criteria. Awards claim unsupported; venture capital not a recognized prize. Membership requirements lack outstanding achievement standard. Appeal dismissed.

An information systems researcher self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Although three initial criteria were satisfied, the applicant failed to establish sufficient additional criteria or sustained national or international acclaim. The AAO found original contributions lacked major significance, published materials came from non-major outlets, and comparative salary evidence was absent.

Computational fluid dynamics researcher with advanced degree sought national interest waiver as EB-2. Petitioner proposed research on thermal management systems. AAO dismissed appeal, finding inadequate evidence of research success, sustained government funding interest, or detailed plan for advancing proposed endeavor.

A systems engineer sought NIW to design cybersecurity frameworks for U.S. energy and oil-gas infrastructure. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the proposed endeavor scope too broadly defined and implausible, and that general cybersecurity importance did not establish the specific endeavor's national importance.

Self-petitioner seeking to establish an IT security consulting firm in Florida claims national interest waiver. Petitioner demonstrated substantial merit of cybersecurity work but failed to show national importance; individual company services lack broader implications extending beyond clients to impact field, region, or nation at requisite level.

AI solutions architect claimed seven extraordinary ability criteria. AAO found petitioner met three required criteria: judging, scholarly articles, and leading role. The case was remanded to SCOPS for final merits determination on whether the totality of evidence establishes extraordinary ability.

A cybersecurity engineer claiming extraordinary ability in EB-1A satisfied four of seven claimed criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding that while regulatory criteria were met, the totality of evidence failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and placement among the very top in the field.

An IT specialist in cloud computing and cybersecurity sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed seven criteria; the Service Center found four met. On appeal, the AAO rejected awards and memberships as unmet and concluded the petitioner failed to satisfy the three-criterion threshold, so final merits was not addressed. Appeal dismissed.

A computer and information research scientist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, and the service center denied the petition. The AAO withdrew that decision and remanded it because the denial blended two different petitioners and beneficiaries and did not clearly state which record or reasons it addressed. No criteria were decided.

A software engineer with a master's in computer engineering seeks EB-2 NIW for work in AI recommendation systems and APIs. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the endeavor failed the national importance prong of Dhanasar because benefits do not extend beyond the employer to regional or national scope.