Published AAO appeal decisions

A pilot sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver for aviation work. AAO dismissed the appeal, holding the petitioner established substantial merit but failed to demonstrate the national importance of his specific proposed endeavor as required by the first Dhanasar prong; general industry importance insufficient.

The petitioner's occupation is not stated in the available text. The petitioner sought extraordinary ability classification, and the Director found fewer than three of ten criteria satisfied. The AAO dismissed the appeal as moot because the petitioner had since adjusted to permanent resident status through another proceeding, so the merits were not reached.

Aircraft mechanic seeking EB-2 national interest waiver. AAO found petitioner failed to establish exceptional ability under EB-2 and that proposed endeavor lacks substantial merit and national importance, failing the first Dhanasar prong. Second and third prongs not addressed.

Commercial captain sought NIW under EB-2 as advanced degree professional. Claimed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance addressing pilot shortage. AAO found record did not establish national importance of specific proposed work as individual pilot, lacking evidence of broader industry impact or individual contribution to resolving shortage.

Aircraft mechanic self-petitioner claimed exceptional ability under EB-2 and sought national interest waiver. AAO affirmed denial because petitioner failed to establish by preponderance of evidence that expertise was significantly above ordinary in field, and thus did not qualify for underlying EB-2 classification required for NIW eligibility.

A petitioner claiming exceptional ability for security management proposed a waiver. The AAO dismissed because the petitioner failed to establish the EB-2 exceptional ability classification (not meeting three of six regulatory criteria) and provided inconsistent, insufficient evidence regarding the specific proposed endeavor required for national interest waiver analysis.

Pilot with advanced degree claimed NIW based on aviation industry pilot shortage and proposed flight instruction or academy work. AAO found proposed endeavor too vague with inconsistent job ideas to determine national importance, failing first Dhanasar prong.

A commercial pilot sought EB-2 exceptional ability classification with a national interest waiver of the job offer. The AAO withdrew the director's findings on the academic record, experience and membership criteria, leaving too few criteria met. It dismissed the appeal and reserved the waiver question without applying the Dhanasar framework.

A pilot sought a national interest waiver with EB-2 classification, proposing to work for U.S. airlines and train other pilots. The service center accepted the underlying classification but denied the waiver. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the endeavor lacked demonstrated national importance, and it did not reach the remaining prongs.

A Chinese company manager petitioned for EB-1A classification claiming extraordinary ability. The applicant met two criteria (published material and leading role) but not the three required. On appeal, the membership criterion was rejected because the associations did not require outstanding achievements. The appeal was dismissed.

Project execution supervisor sought national interest waiver for EB-2 advanced degree. AAO dismissed appeal, finding proposed work lacks national importance despite meeting prong two; improvements limited to employer's projects without broader industry impact or demonstrated U.S. economic effects.

A professional with advanced degree sought national interest waiver for EB-2. The petitioner's motions to reopen and reconsider were dismissed because insufficient new evidence was presented. The AAO affirmed that letters of support and industry evidence did not establish the specific proposed endeavor had national importance under Dhanasar's first prong.

A petitioner proposed unspecified scientific activity and vendor machine development. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the proposed endeavor lacked sufficient specificity and clarity regarding substantial merit and national importance under Dhanasar's first prong.

A micropigmentation professional sought EB-2 classification as individual of exceptional ability and NIW. The AAO dismissed, finding she met only one of three required criteria for exceptional ability: a license to practice. Training certificates did not qualify as official academic records; membership claim was not properly substantiated.

An international organization staff member requested second preference classification as an individual of exceptional ability with a national interest waiver. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding his salary criterion unmet because the pay reflected a standardized scale rather than exceptional ability. It therefore did not reach the waiver question.

A writer and poker lecturer with mathematical doctorates self-petitioned for extraordinary ability. Claimed five criteria (published material, judging, original contributions, scholarly articles, leading role). AAO found no criteria satisfied; publications lacked major media status, articles not in major trade publications, no top-field recognition. Appeal dismissed.

Master mariner and specialist surveyor seeking extraordinary ability classification. Claims seven criteria; AAO affirms director's finding of only one met criterion and dismisses appeal. Petitioner failed three-criterion threshold; awards lack national recognition, membership requires only experience, published material insufficient, original contributions outside field of endeavor.

This is an O-2 decision, not O-1A. The decision concerns whether a beneficiary seeking O-2 status as an accompanying individual to an O-1 artist met the requirement of entering solely to assist the O-1. The AAO dismissed the motion, finding the beneficiary worked independently and did not establish the exclusive accompanying purpose required.

A law firm petitioned for a beneficiary in an advisory role claiming extraordinary ability. The AAO affirmed the service center's finding that the beneficiary met only judging and scholarly articles criteria. The decision rejected original contributions as major significance and leading role claims. The beneficiary lacked sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

Master mariner seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claims six criteria met but satisfies none of ten regulatory criteria; lacks evidence of major significance contributions or sustained acclaim. Does not qualify for classification. Appeal dismissed.

Firefighting technology general manager and company board chairman. Claimed membership in professional associations, original contributions via patents and contracts, and two additional criteria. AAO rejected memberships for requiring only experience rather than outstanding achievements, and original contributions for lack of demonstrated major significance or connection to patents.

Barista with competition wins and judging experience seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met awards and judging criteria but failed to satisfy published material criterion due to missing documentation requirements and unsubstantiated claims about publication standing. Dismissed because only two of three required criteria met.

The petitioner sought O-1A classification for extraordinary ability in the arts. On appeal, the petitioner failed to identify any specific erroneous conclusion of law or fact in the service center's denial and did not submit the promised brief or evidence. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for lack of substantive appellate argument.

A restaurant filed an extraordinary ability petition on behalf of a beneficiary, and the service center denied it. The petitioner indicated on the appeal form that a brief would follow but sent nothing and named no specific error, so the appeal was summarily dismissed without examining any criterion.