Published AAO appeal decisions

Investment firm petitions for O-1A classification for external managers evaluation specialist. Petitioner failed to submit required advisory opinion and satisfied only two of eight evidentiary criteria. Missing published material documentation and failing to establish three alternate criteria, petition dismissed.

A software and investment firm sought O-1 classification for an investment and marketing specialist. After a summary dismissal of the appeal, the firm filed untimely combined motions to reopen and reconsider. The AAO found the delay was not reasonable or beyond the firm's control and dismissed both motions without reaching the merits.

A law office sought to employ an accountant as an H-1B specialty occupation worker, not O-1A. The director denied the petition. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the position resembled a bookkeeping or accounting clerk role that does not require a bachelor's degree in a specific specialty, and no specialty occupation criterion was satisfied.

An accountant position offered by a merchandise wholesaler was filed as an H-1B specialty occupation petition, not an extraordinary ability petition. The employer argued the job requires a bachelor's degree in accounting. The appeal was dismissed because the duties were described generally and none of the four specialty occupation criteria was shown.

A newly formed company sought to employ a chief financial officer for a planned retail food store, classified as a specialty occupation worker under the H-1B category. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the duties and the start-up's circumstances did not show the position required a specific bachelor's degree. This is not an O-1A matter.