Published AAO appeal decisions

A journalist filed an EB-1A petition claiming extraordinary ability. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner failed to meet a major award threshold or three criteria: awards lacked national or international recognition, membership did not require outstanding achievement, and published material was authored rather than about the petitioner.

An employer-sponsored EB-1A petition for a beneficiary alleged three regulatory criteria: awards, membership, and judging. The AAO found the awards limited to students, membership based on standard requirements, and judging activity insufficient to demonstrate extraordinary ability at the very top of the field.

A self-represented scientist sought extraordinary ability classification. The director found sustained acclaim was not shown. On appeal, the petitioner only asserted generally that more than three criteria were met, without elaboration or new evidence. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal for failing to identify any specific erroneous conclusion. No criteria were analyzed.

A petitioner claimed EB-1A extraordinary ability based on competition awards, association lifetime membership, and published materials. The AAO dismissed, finding awards lacked documentation of national or international recognition, membership did not require outstanding achievement, the publication did not relate to his field work, and evidence did not show sustained acclaim.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO summarily dismissed the appeal because counsel failed to submit the promised brief and evidence more than 17 months after filing, and did not address the director's reasons for denial.

The decision concerns a self-represented extraordinary ability petition denied by a service center for failing to show sustained acclaim. On appeal, the AAO dismissed the matter as moot because the petitioner had since been granted lawful permanent residence. No criteria were analyzed and the occupation is not stated.

Self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed at least three regulatory criteria. AAO found petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim through awards, membership, or published material evidence, and did not establish eligibility as extraordinary ability alien.

An EB-1A petitioner claimed to meet at least three criteria for extraordinary ability. The AAO found the petitioner failed to meet awards, membership, and published material criteria. Evidence did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim at the very top level of the field.

Petitioner sought EB-1A classification. Claimed awards, membership, and published material criteria. AAO found award was local not national; association does not require outstanding achievement; online articles lack evidence of major media status. Overall record fails to demonstrate sustained acclaim at very top level.

Restaurant employer petitioned to employ sushi chef as extraordinary ability alien. AAO affirmed denial, finding petitioner submitted no evidence meeting regulatory criteria and beneficiary did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for classification.

A self-represented petitioner claimed extraordinary ability in the sciences, and the director found sustained acclaim was not shown. The appeal form's basis section was blank and the promised brief and evidence never arrived. The AAO dismissed it summarily for failing to identify any error. No criteria were analyzed.

Petitioner in sciences sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Director denied for lack of sustained national or international acclaim. AAO found petitioner met at least three regulatory criteria and that totality of evidence established sustained national acclaim and extraordinary ability warranting approval.

A video game professional satisfied three extraordinary ability criteria. The AAO found published material in major outlets, judging involvement through academy delegation, and overall pattern of sustained national acclaim. Evidence supported that petitioner's entry would benefit the United States.

A self-represented petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, holding that no criteria were met and the petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement within the small percentage at the very top of the field.

An inventor petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability in the sciences. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner did not meet the required criteria: awards were too old or undocumented, and association membership lacked outstanding achievement requirements, failing to demonstrate top-level sustained acclaim.

Self-petitioner in sciences claims extraordinary ability. Petitioner submitted evidence of honorary doctorate and association membership. AAO found honorary doctorate not nationally or internationally recognized and association membership not analyzed. Appeal dismissed; petitioner failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim.

Senior transportation and ITS analyst seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO affirmed denial, finding the petitioner did not meet three criteria and lacked sustained national or international acclaim at the very top of the field.

A petitioner filed EB-1A petition with no evidence supporting regulatory criteria. AAO held petitioner submitted no evidence meeting any criterion; additionally, petitioner knowingly submitted altered documentation with false dates and signatures to mislead USCIS. Appeal dismissed with finding of fraud and willful misrepresentation.

A scientist sought EB-1A classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. The director found no major internationally recognized award and fewer than three regulatory criteria met. On appeal, counsel offered only general statements without identifying any error of law or fact, so the AAO summarily dismissed the appeal.

A petitioner of unstated occupation sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, and the director denied the petition for lack of sustained acclaim. While the appeal was pending, the petitioner became a lawful permanent resident. The AAO dismissed the appeal as moot and did not analyze any criteria.

Comic book author claimed extraordinary ability but failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim. AAO found local awards, inappropriate association membership, and limited-circulation publications insufficient. Evidence did not show petitioner at very top of field.

Self-represented petitioner claimed extraordinary ability but failed to meet award and membership criteria. Awards lacked substantiation and were received over a decade before filing, failing to establish sustained acclaim. No evidence of three regulatory criteria met.

An EB-1A petitioner of unstated occupation was denied because the director found no supporting documentation was submitted. On appeal, counsel said evidence had been filed, and the record confirmed an earlier submission. The AAO withdrew the denial and remanded for a full merits adjudication, without analyzing any criteria.

The decision concerns an extraordinary ability petition denied by a service center for failing to show sustained acclaim. On appeal, the AAO dismissed the matter as moot because the petitioner had since become a lawful permanent resident. No criteria were analyzed and the occupation is not stated.

The decision concerns an extraordinary ability petition denied by a service center for failing to show sustained acclaim. On appeal, the AAO dismissed the matter as moot because the petitioner had since been granted lawful permanent residence. No criteria were analyzed and the occupation is not stated.