Published AAO appeal decisions

A CEO and co-founder of an agricultural technology software company sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed three criteria on appeal: published material, original contributions of major significance, and leading role. The AAO found published materials focused on the company rather than the petitioner, and supporting letters for contributions lacked substantive evidence of major significance. Threshold requirements unmet; appeal dismissed.

Telecommunications engineer sought EB-2 NIW for startup company providing connectivity and cybersecurity solutions. SCOPS found substantial merit but denied lack of national importance. AAO affirmed, finding proposed endeavor lacked specific details about services, job creation, and scale necessary to demonstrate national importance.

A business executive sought O-1A classification through a technology company petitioner. On appeal the petitioner claimed three of eight criteria: published material, original contributions and critical capacity. The AAO dismissed the appeal because none was established, so the initial evidentiary requirement failed and the final merits were reserved.

A Brazilian lawyer and prosecutor self-petitioned for EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO found petitioner met four criteria (judging, scholarly articles, leading roles, though not high salary). However, in the final merits determination, the AAO held the petitioner failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or elite status in the field.

An English as second language teacher sought extraordinary ability classification. The AAO held she met fewer than three evidentiary criteria; her teaching materials and peer respect were insufficient to show sustained national or international acclaim or recognition among the very top of her field. Appeal dismissed.

Business professional in risk management sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Petitioner met three evidentiary criteria but AAO's final merits analysis found evidence of expertise and some recognition insufficient to demonstrate sustained national acclaim or small-percentage top-of-field achievement.

An industrial engineer with a doctorate in transportation engineering sought an EB-2 national interest waiver for predictive maintenance research. The AAO dismissed, finding the petitioner failed to demonstrate she was well positioned to advance the proposed endeavor despite meeting the first prong.

An event planner and entrepreneur sought EB-2 classification as an individual of exceptional ability with a national interest waiver. The service center denied for failing the EB-2 threshold. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner did not specifically challenge the exceptional ability findings, so the Dhanasar prongs were never evaluated.

Legal consultant in alternative dispute resolution sought EB-2 with national interest waiver. Proposed establishing consultancy for ADR and public bond investment. AAO dismissed, finding the specific endeavor lacked demonstrated national importance; petitioner confused field importance with endeavor-specific impact and failed to show broader implications.

A chemist and postdoctoral researcher sought EB-2 national interest waiver for research on high-performance materials for energy conversion. The AAO found the proposed endeavor met the first Dhanasar prong but the petitioner was not well positioned to advance it due to lack of demonstrated success and institutional support. The appeal was dismissed.

A research scientist with a master's degree in electrical and computer engineering sought an NIW for EB-2 classification. The AAO found the proposed endeavor had substantial merit and national importance but dismissed because the petitioner lacked a concrete plan and employment pursuit evidence to demonstrate he was well-positioned to advance it.

A neuroscience postdoctoral researcher and staff research associate claimed extraordinary ability based on seven criteria. The AAO confirmed two criteria: judging and scholarly articles. However, the original contributions criterion failed due to insufficient citations and no evidence of widespread field impact, and the critical role criterion was not properly addressed. Only two criteria met; appeal dismissed.

A journalist from Kazakhstan with roles as poet, writer, and performer sought EB-1A classification. The AAO dismissed, finding she did not establish three of ten criteria: no major award, membership organizations lack required standards, and blog posts do not constitute scholarly articles. Threshold not met; final merits not reached.

Retired professional padel player ranked number one for 13 years sought extraordinary ability classification as coach. AAO determined only two of seven claimed criteria were met. Initial evidence threshold of three criteria not satisfied; final merits determination reserved. Appeal dismissed.

A civil engineer with a master's degree sought EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver for an AI-based construction software tool. The AAO found the petitioner qualified for EB-2 and established substantial merit but dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to demonstrate the national importance required by Dhanasar's first prong.

Civil engineer proposing to found consulting services company in Massachusetts. Failed first Dhanasar prong on national importance; generic consulting for construction companies lacked national or global implications. Business plan contained numerous errors and unreliable financial projections. Appeal dismissed.

Software engineering manager in cloud computing and AI-driven platforms sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. The AAO dismissed the appeal because although the petitioner met three initial criteria, the totality of evidence did not establish sustained national or international acclaim or that he ranks among the very top of his field.

Equestrian trainer and coach self-petitioner could not use athlete achievements as prior acclaim had ended. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner met fewer than three initial evidentiary criteria and did not reach final merits.

Biofuels engineer with advanced degree sought waiver based on proposed ethanol production and export optimization. AAO affirmed SCOPS finding that endeavor lacked national importance, being limited to employer and partners without demonstrated broader impact on ethanol industry or economy. Appeal dismissed.

Petitioner with advanced degree sought EB-2 NIW for project management consultancy using AI optimization. AAO dismissed appeal, finding substantial merit but not national importance. Petitioner conflated industry importance with endeavor-specific prospective impact and failed to demonstrate broader implications beyond her business.

A consultant engineer with 28 years experience sought EB-2 NIW for affordable housing and resilience engineering work. SCOPS approved advanced degree qualification but denied NIW. The AAO affirmed dismissal, finding the proposed endeavor, though in important industry, lacked demonstrated national importance as required by Dhanasar's first prong.

An IT systems engineer seeking EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver filed a self-petition. The AAO found the beneficiary qualified for EB-2 as an advanced degree professional but failed to establish national importance of his proposed endeavor. The vague business plan lacked evidence of significant employment creation or economic benefits at regional or national levels.

A visual artist sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The service center found one criterion met (exhibitions) but not three required. On appeal, the petitioner claimed awards, membership, published material, and leading role. The AAO rejected the awards claim, finding nominations insufficient and team awards lacking individual recognition. Only one criterion satisfied; threshold unmet; appeal dismissed.