Published AAO appeal decisions

A computer engineering researcher with a Ph.D. sought a national interest waiver under Dhanasar. The AAO found his proposed high-performance computing research had substantial merit and national importance but that he failed the second prong, having not demonstrated sufficient impact or interest among peers, and thus dismissed the appeal.

An entrepreneur with an advanced degree sought a national interest waiver to open automotive retail businesses in Florida. The AAO found his proposed endeavor had substantial merit but lacked national importance because it would not extend beyond his business and customers to benefit the broader economy or industry.

Mechanical engineering researcher with Ph.D. sought EB-2 national interest waiver for nanoparticle research. First prong met on research merit and national importance. AAO dismissed, finding petitioner failed second prong: insufficient evidence of independent funding acquisition, citation impact, or demonstrated leadership capacity relative to advisors and coauthors.

Karate athlete seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification based on national and international competition since age eleven. AAO held petitioner failed to meet threshold requirement of three evidentiary criteria. Membership claim lacked documentary support; published materials not in qualifying outlets; original contributions vague. Appeal dismissed without reaching final merits analysis.

Advertising senior account executive petitioned for extraordinary ability. Claimed five criteria; two were met (judging and leading role). Appeal dismissed because membership and high salary criteria were not satisfied. Only two criteria met; three required. Record lacked evidence of top-level sustained acclaim.

Assistant professor of chemistry sought extraordinary ability classification. Claimed five criteria; two met (judging, scholarly articles). AAO affirmed denial because petitioner failed to meet three-criterion threshold and lacked evidence of sustained national or international acclaim or elite standing in chemistry.

Chef sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification claiming six criteria initially, then four on appeal. AAO affirmed director's finding that petitioner met only one criterion and failed to establish three required. On final merits, petitioner lacks sustained national or international acclaim and does not rise to very top of culinary field.

Gymnastics athlete and tumbling performer sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed major awards and at least three alternate criteria. AAO found only one criterion met, gold medals do not qualify as major awards, and overall evidence fails to demonstrate sustained acclaim or top-tier status required for the classification.

Business executive in education sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Claimed four criteria but met none reliably. Published material lacked major media verification; salary evidence unsubstantiated. AAO found insufficient acclaim and recognition for classification.

A Colombian musician claimed four of ten EB-1A criteria. AAO found two met (leading role, exhibitions) but reversed the service center on commercial success. Remezcla article lacked major media status. Only two criteria satisfied; three required. Appeal dismissed.

Aerospace engineering researcher with Ph.D. seeking national interest waiver. First Dhanasar prong met: proposed research has substantial merit and national importance. Appeal dismissed on second prong: insufficient evidence that beneficiary is well positioned to advance proposed research; publications and peer review activity do not constitute adequate record of success.

A wedding and event planning company founder and CEO sought EB-1A claiming seven criteria. AAO found membership criterion unmet because association requirements reflect employment qualifications not outstanding achievements. Judging criterion failed as voting on applications does not constitute judging work in field.

Financial analyst petitioner sought national interest waiver. AAO found petitioner qualified for advanced degree classification but dismissed appeal, concluding proposed work lacked national importance under Dhanasar's first prong; services benefited employer and clients only without sufficient evidence of broader economic effects or job creation.

Financial journalist and brand management executive sought EB-1A extraordinary ability. Met two criteria: judging and scholarly articles. Failed on leading role and high salary. AAO found insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim or top field position. Appeal dismissed.

Biomedical technology company petitions for senior research specialist in cancer research for O-1A visa. Satisfied judging and scholarly articles criteria but failed original contributions of major significance criterion. AAO dismissed, finding insufficient evidence of extraordinary ability.

A financial manager sought an EB-2 national interest waiver to work for U.S. companies on restructuring and foreign investment attraction. The AAO dismissed because her proposed endeavor lacked national importance; it would only benefit her employer and clients, not the financial services industry or broader economy.

An architect and partner at a firm seeks EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. He met two criteria (scholarly articles and leading role) but failed to establish two additional criteria on appeal regarding awards and published material due to insufficient corroboration. The AAO dismissed, finding he lacks the three-criterion threshold and aggregate evidence does not demonstrate the sustained acclaim required.

Energy policy researcher with advanced degree sought NIW for EB-2. AAO found proposed energy research had substantial merit and national importance but dismissed appeal, concluding petitioner failed to demonstrate being well positioned to advance the endeavor without sufficient evidence of means or track record.

A business executive in China sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. She claimed six criteria and the AAO found three met. However, the decision rejected the final merits determination, holding she lacked sustained national or international acclaim and was not among the small percentage at the top of her field, though she held a high-ranking corporate position.

Acrobatic gymnastics performer and circus artist sought extraordinary ability classification. AAO dismissed, finding bronze medal at World Games does not qualify as major internationally recognized award, and only two of ten alternate criteria satisfied, insufficient for classification as individual of extraordinary ability.

Legal consultant seeking national interest waiver for EB-2 advanced degree classification. Petitioner claimed proposed work in cross-border commerce and trade consultation has national importance. AAO affirmed denial, finding work has substantial merit but lacks national importance because benefits would not extend beyond petitioner's company and clients to impact industry or economy broadly.

Orthopedic surgeon specializing in shoulder repair seeking EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. Claimed five criteria including original contributions and scholarly articles. AAO affirmed denial, finding petitioner met only two of three required criteria; original contributions lack evidence of major significance, and overall record does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim required for classification.

Business executive in engineering innovations and industrial sales seeks EB-1A. Claimed to meet awards, published material, and judging criteria. AAO found certificate issued to employer not petitioner, advertisement about product not petitioner, and insufficient evidence of judging peers. Appeal dismissed.

Civil engineering researcher seeking EB-1A classification for extraordinary ability. Petitioner met three evidentiary criteria: judging, original contributions, and scholarly articles. AAO dismissed appeal because evidence failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or position among the very top of the field as required for extraordinary ability.

Wireless communications engineer met three evidentiary criteria but failed final merits determination. Accomplished career and peer support letters insufficient; objective documentation did not show sustained national or international acclaim or top field placement.