Published AAO appeal decisions

An aromatherapist seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claimed six criteria. The AAO found she did not meet the three-criterion minimum. The decision concluded her work does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for this highly restrictive classification.

Fire prevention specialist claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A. Petitioner satisfied three criteria: membership, scholarly articles, and leading role. AAO held final merits prong failed: although respected locally and in capital city, petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim required; articles had limited impact; patents unproven in commercial production or significance.

Self-petitioner claims extraordinary ability and receipt of Hispanic American World Congress award. AAO affirmed denial, finding the award does not meet the narrow standard for major, internationally recognized awards comparable to Nobel Prize or Academy Award.

A petitioner seeking extraordinary ability classification, whose occupation is not described, was denied by the service center for lacking a major internationally recognized award and for not meeting the regulatory criteria. The AAO dismissed the appeal as improperly filed because counsel signed the petitioner's portion of the notice of appeal, so the merits were not reached.

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.