Published AAO appeal decisions

A music producer claimed extraordinary ability based on Latin Grammy nomination and collaboration with a Latin Grammy winner. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the nomination insufficient as a major award, web articles not qualifying published material, and the collaboration not demonstrating original contributions of major significance.

A musician petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO upheld the director's denial, finding the petitioner failed to meet at least three regulatory criteria and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim necessary for the highest classification tier.

Employer-sponsored petition for performing artist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner met only one criterion. The AAO affirmed denial, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim and failure to meet the threshold of three evidentiary categories required for final merits determination.

A film director and writer sought extraordinary ability classification, with counsel never clearly tying evidence to specific criteria. The AAO found counsel failed to identify which criteria applied, treated a director's misstatement of field as harmless, and dismissed the appeal because the petitioner did not carry the burden of proof.

Actress sought extraordinary ability classification. Director found only one criterion met; AAO withdrew that finding and found published material and awards criteria not met, and exhibitions criterion inapplicable to performing artist. Overall evidence insufficient to show petitioner among small percentage at field top.

Contemporary classical music composer petitioner claimed four criteria. AAO found awards lack proper foreign language translations and supporting evidence of competitive recognition. Remaining three criteria not analyzed. Appeal dismissed.

A musician appealed denial of extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal summarily because the petitioner failed to identify specific errors in the director's decision and did not submit a promised brief with additional evidence within one year.

An actor claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A, citing a leading role on a Disney Channel series and letters of recommendation. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner failed to meet three criteria because the television role was singular and undocumented in significance, and letters lacked objective evidence of contributions to the field.

A scientific filmmaker and creator of a science film festival sought EB-1A classification. Petitioner claimed published material, judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles. AAO found all claims failed to meet plain language regulatory requirements. No criteria met; appeal dismissed.

A film artist self-petitioner met the lesser nationally recognized prizes criterion but failed the membership criterion by claiming eligibility based on a single association without documentary support for criterion elements. With only one criterion satisfied, the AAO dismissed the appeal for insufficient evidence of extraordinary ability.

Motion picture or television industry professional petitioner claimed published material and display criteria under EB-1A. AAO upheld director's denial, finding petitioner failed to meet the plain language requirements of the published material criterion and did not satisfy the threshold of three qualifying criteria types. Appeal dismissed.

Perch pole balancing circus performer petitioner sought extraordinary ability classification. AAO found single award insufficient under plural requirement and rejected membership criterion. Petition dismissed because petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and placement among top performers in field.