Published AAO appeal decisions

A mechanical engineer claimed extraordinary ability through contributions to aeronautical research and design. The AAO found judging and original contribution criteria met but rejected the claim that contributions had major significance. The petitioner failed the three-criterion threshold and lacked sustained national or international acclaim.

Managed pressure drilling engineer met three initial criteria: high salary, judging abstracts, and two scholarly articles. AAO dismissed appeal on final merits, finding insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of the field.

Engineering manager sought EB-2 national interest waiver for production engineering role in automotive manufacturing. AAO found the work, though valuable, lacked sufficient national importance as her proposed endeavor would not impact the field or industry broadly beyond her employer.

Mechanical engineer with Ph.D. claimed three criteria: judging, original contributions, scholarly articles. AAO found three criteria met but denied on final merits, finding petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim at top of field, with recognition tied to laboratory rather than individual achievements.

Applied mechanics engineer claimed seven criteria including membership, published material, and judging. AAO sustained judging and scholarly articles but rejected membership based on doctoral degree alone not demonstrating outstanding achievement and published material as self-authored. Did not reach final merits stage.

Mechanical engineering researcher with Ph.D. sought NIW for EB-2 advanced degree classification. AAO found his proposed nanoparticle research met the substantial merit and national importance prong but failed the second prong: insufficient evidence he was well positioned to advance the endeavor through funding history and citations.

Mechanical engineering researcher with Ph.D. sought EB-2 national interest waiver for nanoparticle research. First prong met on research merit and national importance. AAO dismissed, finding petitioner failed second prong: insufficient evidence of independent funding acquisition, citation impact, or demonstrated leadership capacity relative to advisors and coauthors.

Aerospace engineering researcher with Ph.D. seeking national interest waiver. First Dhanasar prong met: proposed research has substantial merit and national importance. Appeal dismissed on second prong: insufficient evidence that beneficiary is well positioned to advance proposed research; publications and peer review activity do not constitute adequate record of success.