Published AAO appeal decisions

A self-petitioner in education sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Counsel claimed at least three regulatory criteria were met. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding no documentary evidence of sustained national or international acclaim in sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics, and that evidence did not demonstrate placement among the very top of the field.

A biblical translator sought EB-1A classification. The AAO found the petitioner submitted no qualifying evidence for any of three attempted criteria: a scholarship was not a recognized prize, association membership lacked documentation of outstanding achievement requirements, and published materials were insufficient. The decision also noted failure to demonstrate prospective substantial benefit to the United States.

Professor and director claiming expertise in yoga, ayurveda, and naturopathy filed EB-1A petition. AAO found petitioner failed to meet at least three regulatory criteria, particularly awards criterion. Evidence lacked primary documentation of major international recognition and showed no sustained acclaim distinguishing petitioner among top practitioners.

Researcher, historian, political scientist, and educator sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed multiple criteria including awards, membership, and published material but failed to meet regulatory requirements. AAO upheld denial, finding evidence insufficient to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement at the very top of the field.

An academic researcher sought extraordinary ability status. The AAO found his career development award reflected only institutional recognition, his professional membership did not require outstanding achievement, and his evidence failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.