Published AAO appeal decisions

Actor in Chinese film, television and theater sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO dismissed appeal, holding petitioner met three regulatory criteria but failed the final merits determination requiring sustained national or international acclaim and placement among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

A stage actor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Although the AAO found she met at least three of ten evidentiary criteria, it dismissed her appeal because her local and regional theater success, Latino-focused media coverage, and festival participation did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim among the very top of the field.

A percussionist who accompanies well-known artists sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming six criteria. The AAO held that awards, membership, exhibitions and commercial success were not satisfied, reserved two others, and so found fewer than three criteria. It added that the record showed no sustained acclaim.

A television and movie producer in China claimed extraordinary ability, satisfying only scholarly articles of ten criteria. The AAO affirmed that five additional claimed criteria were not met or lacked sufficient evidence, and concluded no extraordinary ability was shown, dismissing the appeal.

Filmmaker and director sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met three initial evidentiary criteria including published material, judging participation, and exhibition of work at film festivals. AAO dismissed appeal holding final merits analysis failed: evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or position among small percentage at top of field.

A singer withdrew an appeal after the AAO identified willful misrepresentation of material facts. The petitioner submitted altered trophy images, falsified magazine articles, and fictitious media coverage to support claimed awards and published material criteria. AAO entered a finding of fraud that may render the petitioner inadmissible in future proceedings.

A filmmaker who mainly worked as a first assistant director sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming several evidentiary criteria. The AAO found only judging and exhibitions satisfied, rejecting the others, and dismissed the appeal because the record did not show sustained acclaim or standing among the small percentage at the very top.

Actor self-petitioner claimed three criteria for extraordinary ability. AAO found only published material criterion clearly met, withdrew findings on awards and leading role criteria as insufficient, and concluded overall evidence inadequate to demonstrate sustained acclaim or top-tier status.

A pianist claimed three additional criteria for extraordinary ability. The AAO rejected the service center's findings on awards and published material, finding no national recognition. Original contributions proved unsubstantiated. With fewer than three qualifying criteria, petition failed. Appeal dismissed.

A theater group petitioned for a scenic and projection designer under O-1 classification for extraordinary ability in the arts. The service center denied the petition. On appeal, the AAO found the matter moot because another petitioner's O-1 petition was approved, and dismissed the appeal as abandoned after no response to its notice.

An orchestral violinist sought extraordinary ability classification after the service center found no one-time achievement and fewer than three criteria met. On appeal the petitioner never contested the denial and filed no promised brief or evidence, so the AAO summarily dismissed for failing to identify any error.

A singer from Venezuela seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification based on performances with various ensembles. She met only the judging criterion and one other award was found insufficient to establish national recognition. The AAO dismissed, finding she failed to meet the three-criterion threshold and lacks the sustained national or international acclaim required for the classification.

A visual effects producer claimed extraordinary ability through five criteria. The AAO found the petitioner did not satisfy at least three required criteria: membership evidence was insufficient, recommendation letters lacked specificity about major contributions, and work did not demonstrate field-wide impact or sustained international acclaim.

Mastering engineer in music industry seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed five criteria including awards and scholarly articles. AAO affirmed director's denial, finding petitioner satisfied no evidentiary criteria; Grammy nomination is not prize, published material not from major publications, and contributions to books do not constitute scholarly authorship; lacks evidence of national or international acclaim.

A singer and recording artist claimed extraordinary ability under several criteria. The AAO found three criteria met, including media coverage and judging, but dismissed the appeal because the totality of the evidence, including a Latin Grammy nomination, did not show sustained acclaim or standing among the very top of the field.

Recording engineer seeks extraordinary ability classification claiming receipt of Grammy Award. Record shows he received a certificate for participation as engineer on a Grammy-winning recording, not the award itself. NARAS awards certificates to engineers with less than 51% album time. AAO found he did not document receipt of Grammy Award or that certificate had comparable recognition.

Film and television director seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed five criteria including awards, published material, original contributions, critical role, and artistic display. AAO rejected awards and published material as lacking substantiation. Critical role claim failed for insufficient evidence of organizational distinction. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet three required initial criteria.

A Contemporary Christian music composer and director sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found he met only one criterion: judging. Awards lacked recognition, original contributions showed no broad field impact. Appeal dismissed for failure to meet three-criterion requirement.

Author and screenwriter seeking EB-1A classification. Claimed awards, published materials in major media, and judging criteria. AAO found 2016 award not nationally recognized, publications lacked major media status, and judging participation insufficiently documented. Appeal dismissed.

A violinist claimed extraordinary ability under seven criteria including awards, membership, published material, judging, and leading critical role. Only judging and leading critical role criteria were established. Awards, membership, and published material claims were rejected. Acclaim by association with prestigious institutions insufficient. Appeal dismissed.

A talent management agency sought O-1 classification for an actress and dancer under the arts standard. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the oral agreement summary was deficient and the evidence did not satisfy at least three of the alternative criteria. The case concerns arts, not O-1A.

Singer and songwriter of traditional Irish music claimed extraordinary ability. Director found three criteria met but petitioner failed final merits showing sustained acclaim. AAO reviewed and withdrew Director's three-criterion findings, particularly published material. No sustained international recognition established.

The petitioner is a stage, television and film actress seeking extraordinary ability classification on her own behalf. She claimed several evidentiary criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the initial three-criteria requirement unmet because awards, membership and leading-role evidence fell short, and the record did not show sustained acclaim.

Film production company petitioned for storyboard artist with O-1A extraordinary ability visa. Petitioner claimed at least three evidentiary criteria met but AAO found evidence satisfied fewer than three required criteria: no significant award, no lead role in distinguished productions, insufficient published material recognition.