Published AAO appeal decisions

A tax consultant with a law degree sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed six criteria but met none. The AAO found her honors and publications did not meet regulatory standards and her achievements, while notable in academia, lacked the sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Attorney and social responsibility expert seeks NIW for EB-2 advanced degree classification. Proposed creating business promoting family values, work-life balance, and social responsibility. AAO dismissed appeal, finding proposed endeavor lacks national importance despite substantial merit; evidence showed past philanthropy but no evidence of prospective impact at national level.

Political scientist sought EB-2 national interest waiver after qualifying for advanced degree classification. Director found substantial merit but not national importance. AAO affirmed, holding petitioner failed to demonstrate specific prospective impact of Central Asian affairs research on field or U.S. economy at requisite level.

A police sheriff sought national interest waiver for law enforcement or corporate security consulting work. The AAO found the petitioner does not qualify as advanced degree professional and failed to demonstrate her proposed endeavor has national importance beyond specific employers or school programs.

Intellectual property specialist sought national interest waiver for proposed company providing IP services to biotech, tech, and art companies. AAO held industry importance insufficient; petitioner's specific IP audit services lack sufficient prospective impact on field or regional economy. Appeal dismissed.

Legal analyst sought EB-2 national interest waiver. Director found petitioner qualified for underlying EB-2 classification but failed all three Dhanasar prongs. AAO affirmed, finding petitioner changed proposed endeavor from legal analyst to legal business analyst entrepreneur, preventing coherent Dhanasar analysis.

An attorney specializing in international dispute resolution and arbitration claimed EB-1A classification. The Director improperly dismissed the petition without analyzing evidentiary criteria, wrongly concluding attorneys fall outside extraordinary ability categories. The AAO found the petitioner's work in international arbitration falls within the business field and remanded for proper evaluation of claimed criteria.

Legal analyst with advanced degree sought NIW. AAO found proposed work has substantial merit but lacks national importance because it would not extend beyond employer and clientele to impact field broadly or demonstrate substantial positive economic effects for the nation.

Legal consultant with advanced degree sought NIW. Director approved advanced degree qualification but denied NIW. AAO affirmed, finding proposed legal consulting work for Brazil–South America clients lacks national importance despite substantial merit, as it lacks broader field impact or substantial U.S. economic benefit.

International law attorney filed 15th combined motion to reopen and reconsider EB-1A denial. Motion fails procedural requirements for reopening; newly submitted evidence post-dates petition filing and does not demonstrate eligibility at time of filing. Prior dismissal affirmed across multiple motions. Motion dismissed.

Research analyst with advanced degree sought NIW for EB-2 proposing research on preventing recidivism in juvenile detention facilities. AAO found beneficiary qualified for EB-2 but dismissed because proposed endeavor lacked sufficient evidence of national importance or broader field impact.

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.