Published AAO appeal decisions

A triathlete seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner satisfied only two of ten required evidentiary criteria: published materials and awards. She did not establish membership in elite associations or critical roles, and failed to demonstrate sustained national acclaim placing her in the small percentage at the very top of triathlon.

A taekwondo instructor and athlete sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found he met the judging criterion but not the awards or membership criteria, and overall did not demonstrate the sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

An MMA lightweight fighter sought EB-1A classification claiming a major international award and multiple alternate criteria. The AAO found the petitioner met published material and high salary criteria but lacked the major international award and failed to establish sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability.

A dogsledding competitor claimed three EB-1A criteria. The AAO affirmed the director's finding that she lacks a major, internationally recognized award and failed to satisfy three criteria despite meeting two (awards and leading role). The totality lacked evidence of sustained acclaim at the very top of the field.

A Taekwon-Do athlete from Kyrgyzstan seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed because the petitioner did not establish a major award or meet three evidentiary criteria; the judging and published material criteria were not satisfied, and the overall record lacks evidence of sustained national or international acclaim.

Gymnastics trampoline and tumbling coach sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed three criteria: membership in associations, leading or critical role, and comparable evidence of awards. AAO found one criterion met but insufficient to reach three-criterion threshold, thus dismissed the appeal without addressing final merits.

A judoka petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The petitioner claimed three criteria: awards, membership, and published materials. The AAO affirmed the Service Center's denial, finding the petitioner failed to meet any three criteria; awards and membership lacked documented national significance and recognition standards.

Fitness trainer and yoga instructor sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed six criteria: membership, published materials, judging, original contributions, scholarly articles, and high salary. AAO found membership criterion unmet due to insufficient evidence of outstanding achievement requirements; published materials not in major outlets; and scholarly article written for general public, not learned audience. Overall record lacks sustained acclaim required.

A jiu-jitsu athlete self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability status, claiming five evidentiary criteria. The AAO found awards established one criterion but rejected membership and judging as not meeting regulatory requirements. The decision concluded the petitioner lacked the sustained acclaim and top-tier recognition required for the classification.

Brazilian jiu-jitsu athlete and coach seeks extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner established two of ten criteria but failed to meet three-criterion threshold. Original contributions and leading critical role claims rejected as unsupported by evidence of significant field impact. AAO found petitioner lacked sustained acclaim required for top-tier status.

Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu coach with 40+ years experience seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met only two of ten required criteria: judging and leading role. Failed to demonstrate major international award or sufficient acclaim to establish extraordinary ability standard.

A retired professional soccer player seeks EB-1A classification. He satisfied four initial evidentiary criteria. However, the AAO affirmed the director's final merits finding that his career lacked sustained national or international acclaim, with media coverage concentrated in 2011-2015 rather than throughout his career.

A mountain climber and scout self-petitioner sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding he met only one of the ten evidentiary criteria (published materials) but not the required three minimum. Overall record did not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or elite recognition.

Brazilian jiu-jitsu athlete and coach seeks EB-1A. Claims include competition awards and association membership. AAO found competition medals lack national or international recognition and insufficient media coverage; membership claim not adequately established; does not meet three-criterion threshold or demonstrate extraordinary ability.

Hockey referee seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Met one criterion (leading critical role) but failed to satisfy minimum three-criteria threshold. Lacked major awards, qualifying association membership, judging role, or demonstrated original contributions of significance. Appeal dismissed.

Synchronized swimming athlete and coach met initial evidentiary criteria but failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim; seven to eight year gap after relocating to US showed failure to maintain commensurate level of achievement required for extraordinary ability.

An athlete in an unpopular U.S. sport met two criteria on initial review. AAO affirmed dismissal because petitioner failed to explain how post-filing awards applied to the original petition, made only generalized appeals without specific arguments, and did not justify why regulatory criteria did not apply to his field.

A Brazilian jiujitsu coach beginning in 2012 and coaching since 2015 sought EB-1A classification. The AAO found insufficient evidence of major awards, published material, or judging that demonstrates sustained acclaim and status among the very top of the field.

Competitive cyclist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner met fewer than three regulatory criteria; published material criterion failed due to limited publication scope, and judging criterion failed because refereeing duties do not constitute judging work of others.

Powerlifting athlete claims extraordinary ability based on team membership, published articles, and judging roles. AAO found insufficient evidence of three required criteria: membership lacked documentation of selection standards, published material unrelated to U.S. work, and overall record insufficient for extraordinary ability classification.

Volleyball coach and former athlete seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Petitioner met four initial criteria but failed final merits analysis. AAO held petitioner lacked sustained national or international acclaim as coach and did not demonstrate top-tier achievement in coaching career.

An MMA fighter sought EB-1A classification based on extraordinary ability in athletics. The AAO found she met the awards criterion but failed the membership criterion due to insufficient documentation of selection criteria. The record lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim required for extraordinary ability, and the appeal was dismissed.

A judo martial artist met four EB-1A initial evidentiary criteria through awards, membership, published material, and judging. However, the AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained national or international acclaim and top-tier status to satisfy the final merits determination for extraordinary ability.

Equestrian rider and trainer specializing in show jumping sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed, finding petitioner met only two of three required initial criteria (awards and judging) and failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim and placement among the very top of the field.

A handball player and sports coach claimed extraordinary ability under EB-1A, asserting eligibility under three criteria. The AAO affirmed that the petitioner met awards and judging criteria but found membership in a Russian federation did not require demonstrated outstanding achievement. Overall, the petitioner failed to establish sustained national acclaim and position at the very top of the field.