Published AAO appeal decisions

Video editor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed because petitioner met only one criterion (exhibitions); two withdrawn on review (judging, high salary lack proper evidence). Failed to meet three-criterion threshold and demonstrated no sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

A film content creator sought NIW for EB-2 as individual of exceptional ability. AAO dismissed appeal because petitioner met only one of six required criteria for exceptional ability, failing to establish underlying EB-2 eligibility; NIW Dhanasar prongs reserved.

A television and film producer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, adopting the service center's detailed analysis that the petitioner failed to establish receipt of major internationally recognized awards or satisfaction of three required evidentiary criteria, and thus did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim.

Film and television producer sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification and national interest waiver. AAO affirmed service center denial, finding petitioner met only two of six regulatory criteria for exceptional ability; letters lacked specific detail on recognition and awards lacked nexus to petitioner's contributions.

A combat zone camera operator seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed because although petitioner meets three initial evidentiary criteria, the overall record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim; one film festival appearance and three television interviews over 14 years do not demonstrate the career of acclaimed work required.

Filmmaker with thirty years experience claimed extraordinary ability through awards, membership, published material, and exhibitions. AAO affirmed awards and membership were not met, published material insufficient, and exhibitions alone do not establish sustained national or international acclaim required.

An audio-video editor, filmmaker, and producer sought EB-2 and NIW. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish eligibility for EB-2 classification, lacking adequate credentials evaluation and not meeting the advanced degree or exceptional ability requirements.

A musician sought extraordinary ability classification, and the director found no major internationally recognized award and none of the ten alternative criteria satisfied. The appeal was summarily dismissed because it only made general assertions of error, mistakenly requested a national interest waiver, and repeated earlier submissions without identifying specific errors.

Music agent petitions for pianist beneficiary for O-1A extraordinary ability. Director found beneficiary did not meet initial evidentiary criteria. AAO affirmed, finding petitioner failed to demonstrate two claimed criteria and did not qualify for comparable evidence consideration.

Gospel singer from Brazil sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification and national interest waiver. AAO affirmed service center denial, finding petitioner failed to meet three of six regulatory criteria for exceptional ability, including insufficient documentation of ten years full-time experience and lack of recognition for significant contributions to field.

Choreographer seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification in arts. Petitioner submitted evidence of exhibitions and claimed six additional criteria. AAO found only exhibitions criterion met; awards, membership, published material, and original contributions not established; appeal dismissed.

Film director/editor seeking EB-2 with national interest waiver initially proposed teaching cinematic arts, then shifted to establishing a business teaching film production. AAO dismissed because material change to proposed endeavor was impermissible; original endeavor lacked sufficient detail to analyze national importance.

Entertainment group petitioned for singer beneficiary for O-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner failed to establish award-status level or three documentation forms, did not properly file for accompanying O-2 beneficiaries, and appeal was dismissed.

A disc jockey and sound producer sought extraordinary ability classification in the arts, claiming a number of regulatory criteria. The AAO treated the field as DJ and sound production, found the evidence on awards and published material insufficient, and held that three criteria were not satisfied, so it dismissed the appeal.

Fashion model with O-1 nonimmigrant status sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding she satisfied only one of ten initial evidentiary criteria; comparable evidence argument without demonstrating inapplicability of specific criteria was rejected; insufficient proof of sustained acclaim.

Self-petitioner film director and producer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO found only one of six required criteria met. Evidence of awards, original contributions, exhibitions, and critical roles was insufficient or unsupported. Record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.

Sports journalist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner met only judging criterion; published material and leading role criteria not established. Record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for classification to top small percentage in field.

Argentine theater and television actor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed six criteria; AAO found he met published materials and exhibitions but not three total required. Record lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or top-tier field status.

Chef beneficiary seeking O-1A nonimmigrant classification for extraordinary ability. Did not receive significant awards, did not demonstrate lead or starring role in distinguished productions, lacked published recognition, and did not show high salary relative to field. Appeal dismissed.

A bassoonist claiming EB-1A extraordinary ability satisfied two of ten evidentiary criteria: judging and artistic exhibitions. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to demonstrate a third required criterion and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim necessary for extraordinary ability classification.

Recording engineer and producer from Brazil claiming seven evidentiary criteria for EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO found only published material criterion met, not the required three. Record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement at very top of field despite successful work with well-known artists.

Audio, mixing, and recording engineer sought O-1A nonimmigrant classification through employer sponsor. Petitioner failed to establish award nomination or three of six alternate criteria. Only one criterion met (significant recognition). Lead role performances and required documentation forms not established.

Television and motion picture producer claimed five criteria for EB-1A. AAO rejected published material, judging, and critical role findings; awards and exhibitions not reached. Fewer than three criteria met; no demonstrated sustained acclaim.

Armenian pop and folk musician sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO affirmed dismissal, finding petitioner met only two of ten criteria (awards and artistic display) but needed three, and did not demonstrate sustained national acclaim or place at top of field.