Published AAO appeal decisions

A mathematician with a Ph.D. sought an EB-2 national interest waiver for mathematical research with government initiative alignment. The AAO agreed the proposed endeavor meets the first Dhanasar prong but found the petitioner is not well-positioned to advance it due to unclear employment status, unclear research duties, and insufficient evidence of available funding and institutional support.

Applied and computational mathematician self-petitioned for EB-2 NIW to research guaranteed algorithms for large-scale systems, claiming prospective applications in cancer research, energy, and artificial intelligence. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding substantial merit but insufficient evidence of national importance because the connection between the proposed research and asserted national-level impacts was too attenuated.

Applied mathematician with doctorate proposed algorithm optimization for medical devices. Possessed substantial merit but failed to establish national importance of specific endeavor. Evidence about medical devices industry and general STEM field importance insufficient without showing direct national impact. Appeal dismissed.

A postdoctoral researcher in applied mathematics sought NIW for research on mathematical models for ecology and conservation. The AAO remanded because SCOPS failed to provide detailed analysis of national importance, the petitioner's qualifications, and the balance of waiver factors under Dhanasar.

Quantum mathematics researcher sought national interest waiver as advanced degree holder. Met EB-2 advanced degree requirement but failed first Dhanasar prong. Recommendation letters lacking specificity about proposed endeavor; insufficient evidence that research has national importance beyond field prestige.

A mathematics researcher with a Ph.D. in applied mathematics sought a national interest waiver to forgo job offer requirement. He proposed research into partial differential equations and heat transfer. The AAO sustained the appeal, finding all three Dhanasar prongs satisfied: the endeavor has substantial merit and national importance, he is well-positioned to advance it, and waiving the job offer benefits the U.S.

A mathematical researcher petitioned by a financial management business for EB-1A classification. Four criteria were met: judging, scholarly articles, critical role, and high salary. However, the AAO dismissed the appeal because the totality of evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the very top in the field.

A mathematics lecturer proposed numerical methods research projects. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to demonstrate national importance of his specific proposed research endeavors under Dhanasar's first prong, despite strong citation record.

Doctoral student in mathematics sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner met only scholarly articles criterion; did not satisfy three-criterion threshold. AAO declined to analyze original contributions claim as insufficient initial evidence. No evidence of sustained national acclaim.

Mathematician self-petitioner sought EB-1A classification. Claimed three criteria beyond two found by Director (judging and scholarly articles). AAO determined three-criterion threshold not met; final merits showed aggregate record does not support required acclaim or recognition.

A mathematics professor self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO affirmed that he satisfied only two criteria: judging and scholarly articles. His original contributions claim failed because citation counts and expert assertions did not demonstrate major significance in mathematics, and he did not reach the three-criterion threshold.

Bioinformatics research scientist with PhD in statistics claimed extraordinary ability through peer review, original contributions, and scholarly articles. AAO found peer review criterion met, but original contributions criterion failed because article citations and journal ranking did not demonstrate major significance. Overall evidence insufficient for extraordinary ability. Appeal dismissed.

Operations research petitioner claimed three criteria. AAO found NSF grant insufficient as award and articles not primarily about petitioner, but accepted original contributions criterion met. Only one of three minimum criteria satisfied. Appeal dismissed.

Mathematician specializing in harmonic theory of geometry and analysis claimed extraordinary ability based on awards and citations. AAO dismissed the appeal because awards lacked recognition and citations merely referenced work without evaluating impact or standing, failing to show sustained acclaim at the very top.

A statistician sought EB-1A classification, claiming prizes, memberships, published material, and citations of scholarly work. The AAO found student-only prizes and fee-based memberships insufficient, and held the citation record did not fit the contributions criterion. Overall, the evidence showed talent but not sustained acclaim at the top, so the appeal was dismissed.

Statistician sought EB-1A classification based on dissertation prize, professional memberships, and citation record. AAO dismissed, finding academic awards limited to student competition, memberships non-exclusive, citations alone insufficient for three criteria, and overall evidence failing to demonstrate sustained national acclaim.

Mathematician sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner claimed membership, published material, judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles criteria. The AAO rejected all criteria, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim and lack of documentation showing major contributions to the field.