Published AAO appeal decisions

A traditional Chinese medicine physician sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found the petitioner satisfied only two criteria: judging and scholarly articles. The petitioner claimed three additional criteria but failed to demonstrate they were met. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner did not meet the required threshold of at least three criteria.

A cardiologist employed at a university medical school sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found three criteria met: judging, scholarly articles, and critical role. However, the final merits analysis rejected the petition, finding the petitioner's peer review participation, publications, and research role on cardiac arrest did not demonstrate sustained acclaim or placement among the field's elite.

Medical technologist employed at biocontainment facility sought NIW for EB-2 classification. AAO found substantial merit in laboratory work but rejected national importance requirement, concluding benefits were limited to employer rather than broader field impact, and dismissed appeal.

A clinical fellow in pulmonary and critical care medicine sought extraordinary ability classification in the sciences. The service center denied the petition. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because the appeal statement identified no specific erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the denial, so no criteria were examined.

An outpatient mental health clinic sought O-1A extension for a psychotherapist. The decision notes the beneficiary works in psychotherapy and mental health, which is not listed in the O-1A regulatory categories (sciences, education, business, athletics). This appears to be O-1B or an inappropriate O-1A classification. The visa category attribute conflicts with the field.

An audiologist claimed extraordinary ability through five evidentiary criteria. The AAO found only scholarly articles criterion met. Awards, membership, published material about petitioner, and artistic exhibition criteria were rejected. Without three criteria met, final merits review was unnecessary. Appeal dismissed.

Integrative medicine professional with advanced degree sought EB-2 NIW. AAO found first Dhanasar prong met regarding research merit and national importance, but rejected petition after finding petitioner not well positioned to advance proposed research due to lack of success record or demonstrated interest from field.

Physician and neurology researcher seeks NIW for EB-2 based on mobile app development to improve stroke treatment. AAO found proposed endeavor has substantial merit and national importance but dismissed appeal because applicant failed to demonstrate he is well positioned to advance the project through business experience or funding documentation.