Published AAO appeal decisions

A legal analyst self-petitioned for EB-2 NIW classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the proposed endeavor lacks the national importance required under Dhanasar's first prong. The work—consulting on cross-border activities—was confined to specific employers and clients without broader field implications or substantial economic effects.

Legal analyst seeking EB-2 national interest waiver claimed her consulting work on cross-border corporate matters would generate national economic benefits. AAO dismissed appeal, finding the proposed endeavor lacks sufficient prospective impact beyond her employer and clients to demonstrate national importance under Dhanasar's first prong.

Legal adviser self-petitioner sought national interest waiver for EB-2. AAO dismissed appeal, holding proposed endeavor as foreign legal consultant lacks national importance; work would benefit specific employers and Brazil-focused clients, not the legal field or U.S. economy broadly.

An IED disposal officer sought EB-2 NIW claiming expertise in security and real estate investment. The AAO dismissed because the applicant failed to specify the actual endeavor; vague references to possible government consulting or residential real estate investment lacked concrete detail needed to assess national importance.

Legal analyst and consultant seeking NIW under EB-2. Claimed substantial merit and national importance for proposed consulting business advising U.S. companies entering Latin American markets. AAO held the endeavor lacks national importance because it would not impact the field broadly, has no demonstrated substantial economic effects, and lacks evidence of significant employment or regional benefit.

Security expert sought NIW for EB-2. Service Center approved advanced degree qualification but denied NIW. AAO dismissed because petitioner failed to describe specific proposed endeavor with sufficient detail to establish substantial merit and national importance.

A counterterrorism security expert with a master's degree sought a national interest waiver for EB-2 classification. While qualified as an advanced degree holder, he failed to demonstrate that his proposed security or emergency management work had national importance or sufficient prospective impact, lacking specific details about his endeavor.

Legal consultant seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed membership and original contributions in addition to scholarly articles. AAO found only two criteria met: scholarly articles met, but membership criterion withdrawn due to insufficient evidence. Original contributions lacked demonstration of significance. Overall record did not show sustained national or international acclaim or placement among field's very top.

A legal consultant self-petitioned for EB-2 NIW classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, agreeing the proposed endeavor lacks national importance under Dhanasar's first prong. Cross-border business consulting for a specific firm and its clients did not demonstrate broader implications for the field or substantial positive economic effects.

A social work coordinator sought a national interest waiver for an EB-2 position. The AAO found the petitioner qualified for advanced degree classification but failed the first Dhanasar prong: the proposed endeavor lacked national importance, had only state-level scope, and showed no potential for national economic effects or process improvements.

A lawyer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed five criteria and the director found one met. The AAO agreed only one criterion was satisfied and found insufficient sustained national or international acclaim at the top of the field, dismissing the appeal based on uncorroborated assertions and limited objective documentation.

An attorney specializing in environmental and energy law sought EB-2 national interest waiver. The AAO found substantial merit in the proposed endeavor but concluded the petitioner failed to establish national importance under Dhanasar's first prong; recommendation letters addressed past work rather than the specific prospective endeavor details required.

Professor and researcher in law petitioned for extraordinary ability. Director found two criteria met (judging and scholarly articles). On appeal, petitioner claimed two additional criteria (published material and original contributions), both rejected. Appeal dismissed; only two criteria met, three required. Insufficient sustained acclaim evidence.

A writer and consultant in occupational safety and mediation claimed seven criteria for extraordinary ability, later adding two more. The AAO found only judging criterion met and concluded insufficient evidence of the required acclaim for sustained national or international recognition in the field.

An international tax attorney specializing claimed six criteria but met none. The AAO found his bar association membership, published work, judging, original contributions, scholarly articles, and leading role all unmet. Lacking three criteria and evidence of sustained international acclaim, the petition was dismissed.

A polygraph examiner, researcher and instructor sought extraordinary ability classification, claiming many evidentiary criteria. The AAO found only scholarly articles and judging satisfied, rejecting awards, membership and published material. Fewer than three criteria were met, and the aggregate record did not show sustained acclaim, so the appeal was dismissed.

A self-identified social reformer seeking EB-1A classification. Claimed three criteria but met none. Awards from local charitable organizations not nationally or internationally recognized. Petition failed minimum evidentiary threshold; AAO did not reach final merits or remaining claimed criteria.

Human rights lawyer and researcher sought EB-1A classification. Claimed eight criteria; director found three met. AAO sustained appeal, finding petitioner demonstrated sustained national acclaim through dedicated career attracting high-level attention and respect, with intent to continue work benefiting the United States.

Legal consultant seeking national interest waiver for EB-2 advanced degree classification. Petitioner claimed proposed work in cross-border commerce and trade consultation has national importance. AAO affirmed denial, finding work has substantial merit but lacks national importance because benefits would not extend beyond petitioner's company and clients to impact industry or economy broadly.

An international relations scholar and consultant had EB-1A approval revoked. The AAO dismissed his appeal, finding he satisfied only one of ten criteria and lacked required initial evidence or documented sustained acclaim for extraordinary ability in the field.

A journalist and patron of the arts sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification but failed to identify a single field encompassing her journalism, stage production, and arts organizing activities. The AAO rejected her claims under judging, leading or critical role, and membership criteria, finding insufficient or inconsistent evidence. The appeal was dismissed.

A lawyer sought NIW as EB-2 advanced degree professional, proposing to provide legal services. The AAO dismissed, finding her tax advice practice lacks national importance and her evidence of pro bono experience does not support her stated tax law endeavor. The first prong failed; remaining prongs were not addressed.

An attorney, mediator, journalist and author claimed extraordinary ability. The AAO found the petitioner satisfied only two of ten required criteria: judging and scholarly articles. Because three criteria are required, the appeal was dismissed without a final merits determination.

A social protection specialist sought NIW for EB-2 classification based on international development work in Egypt and Yemen. Petitioner claimed substantial merit and national importance of social protection initiatives, positioning to advance them, and that waiver benefits the US. AAO sustained appeal, finding all three Dhanasar prongs satisfied.

Minister in community development sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with national interest waiver. AAO dismissed appeal as abandoned for failure to respond to RFE. Alternatively, held petitioner failed to establish exceptional ability and did not meet any prong of the Dhanasar national interest waiver framework.