Published AAO appeal decisions

Race car driver and suspension specialist sought EB-1A. Claimed extraordinary ability in sports and team management. AAO held record did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or placement in the very top percentage of the field, dismissing the petition.

Wrestling coach EB-1A petitioner appealed denial with general assertion that documents were underweighted but failed to identify specific director errors or address regulatory criteria. AAO summarily dismissed under 8 CFR 103.3(a)(1)(v) for lack of specific challenge to denial rationale.

Professional light middleweight boxer claimed extraordinary ability with evidence of awards and national amateur titles. AAO dismissed because despite meeting awards criterion, the overall evidence does not demonstrate petitioner among the very top of the field at national or international level.

Wushu athlete and instructor petitioner failed to specifically address director's findings on appeal, merely reasserting achievements without responding to deficiencies. Director rejected awards, membership, publications, exhibitions, and leading role criteria. AAO dismissed appeal summarily for failure to identify erroneous conclusions and rejected combining athletic and coaching accomplishments as impermissible.

Fencing coach self-petitioner claimed extraordinary ability through six regulatory criteria. AAO found petitioner met fewer than three criteria under plain language: awards to students do not qualify, athlete membership does not satisfy coaching association requirement in plural form. Comparable evidence not available; petition dismissed.

Martial artist self-petitioner did not submit qualifying evidence under at least three regulatory criteria, failing the antecedent requirement. AAO concluded petitioner lacked sufficient evidence to proceed to final merits determination and dismissed appeal.