Published AAO appeal decisions

Martial arts competitor and coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Satisfied awards and judging criteria only. AAO rejected membership claim lacking expert recognition documentation and published material claim lacking proper attribution and venue. Failed to meet three-criterion threshold or demonstrate top-of-field extraordinary ability.

A soccer player met four initial extraordinary ability criteria but failed the final merits test. AAO found his 15-year career and media coverage did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or placement among the small percentage at the very top of professional soccer.

Beneficiary seeking EB-1A as athletic instruction school chief instructor and former competitor. AAO dismissed because beneficiary met only one of ten criteria (judging) when three required; lacks sustained recent national/international acclaim; record does not support extraordinary ability.

Fitness management company petitioned for O-1A classification for bodybuilder after initial approval was revoked. AAO dismissed appeal, affirming revocation because beneficiary met only awards criterion and lacked sufficient documentation of membership, publications, and legitimate high salary evidence.

Coaching professional applied for EB-2 with advanced degree or exceptional ability, plus NIW. AAO found petitioner lacked five years progressive experience in specialty and failed to establish exceptional ability through required criteria. Decision did not reach NIW analysis because petitioner failed prerequisite EB-2 eligibility.

An entrepreneur in vehicle competition and recreation sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. AAO remanded because the Director failed to properly analyze several claimed criteria and applied unsupported evidentiary standards, particularly regarding published material and continuation of work in the United States.

Horse breeding business petitioned for stallion manager as O-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner claimed seven criteria but AAO found only one met. Comparable evidence for awards criterion rejected because petitioner failed to show criterion does not apply to occupation. Appeal dismissed.

Martial arts studio petitioned for instructor beneficiary for O-1A extraordinary ability in athletics. Beneficiary met only one of three required initial criteria and could not establish sustained national or international acclaim; appeal dismissed.

Athlete and coach in combat sport claimed extraordinary ability through five evidentiary criteria. AAO found he met only the awards criterion but failed the published material and membership criteria. Lacking three qualifying criteria, petitioner did not satisfy initial evidence requirement and did not demonstrate sustained acclaim at the top of the field.

A cricket official and administrator seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He claimed four evidentiary criteria including membership, judging, published material, and critical role. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding he met zero criteria; membership and judging claims failed, and other claimed criteria were not reached.

Soccer athlete and youth coach seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed one major award and satisfaction of at least three evidentiary criteria. AAO held coaching certificates are not major internationally recognized awards and evidence does not establish three criteria met. Record lacks extensive documentation of sustained national or international acclaim required for this classification.

Competitive swimmer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification based on national medals and team membership. AAO affirmed that petitioner met only two of ten criteria, falling short of the required three. Appeal dismissed because petitioner lacked sustained acclaim and did not demonstrate placement among top of field.

Police officer and trainer in Brazil seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification, claiming jiu-jitsu medal and various professional achievements. AAO found only three criteria met but rejected petition at final merits stage, finding petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim required for classification.

An athlete management business sought to extend O-2 status for two support workers accompanying a professional athlete holding O-1 status, working as content creators and media strategists. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the record did not show substantial experience with critical skills integral to the athlete's performance, and credibility concerns arose.

Amateur athlete and coach claiming extraordinary ability in athletics. Petitioner met three initial criteria but failed final merits step: lacked sustained acclaim, no competition or awards post-2017, limited media coverage, and coaching work did not demonstrate top-level achievement required for EB-1A.

Fitness instructor and entrepreneur sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver for fitness business. AAO dismissed because proposed endeavor lacks national importance; business would impact individual clients but not fitness industry broadly or nation.

A martial arts coach sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver under Dhanasar. AAO dismissed, finding the proposed endeavor as a coach and trainer lacked sufficient evidence of substantial merit and national importance, failing the first prong of the framework.

An athlete seeking NIW claimed exceptional ability through criteria including ten years full-time experience and recognition. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding he did not meet three of six regulatory criteria for exceptional ability, thus did not qualify for underlying EB-2 classification.

A martial arts competitor and coach sought EB-1A classification. The AAO found he did not meet the initial evidence threshold of a major award or three evidentiary criteria. Awards lacked demonstrated national or international recognition, and published material related to his work as a player rather than coach. The petition was dismissed.

A sports club petitioned for its coach, a former Olympic-level competitor, claiming extraordinary ability. The director accepted four criteria but denied on final merits regarding coaching recognition. The AAO sustained the appeal, finding the beneficiary reached the top as an athlete and sustained that acclaim as a coach.

Athlete sought NIW for EB-2 as exceptional ability professional. Petitioner claimed national team membership, awards, and competition history. AAO dismissed because petitioner failed to meet underlying EB-2 eligibility criteria (did not satisfy three of six exceptional ability criteria). Dhanasar prongs reserved as analysis unnecessary without qualifying basis.

Athletic trainer qualified as individual of exceptional ability but sought national interest waiver for fitness startup company. AAO found proposed endeavor lacks national importance; hiring eleven workers and local client services insufficient to demonstrate broader implications required by Dhanasar framework.

Self-petitioning pilot seeks NIW as EB-2 advanced degree or exceptional ability professional. Failed to qualify for underlying EB-2 classification (only two of six criteria met). AAO dismissed; pilot work as proposed lacks substantial merit and national importance; endeavor insufficiently documented and explained.

A martial arts athlete competing in karate sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding he satisfied only two of three required criteria: judging and one other. Awards lacked national recognition; national team membership evidence was inconsistent regarding selection rigor.