Published AAO appeal decisions

An operations research analyst with a PhD sought an EB-2 NIW for data-driven research in supply chain and financial markets. The AAO dismissed because the petitioner failed to demonstrate her specific endeavor's national importance, confusing the importance of the field with the importance of her proposed work.

Petitioner appealed dismissal of motion to reopen and reconsider prior NIW denial. AAO held appeal concerns only procedural motion dismissal not underlying petition denial; petitioner waived substantive arguments by not appealing original denial and failing to articulate legal error in motion dismissal.

Aerospace researcher claimed five evidentiary criteria for extraordinary ability. AAO found she met fewer than three criteria required and lacked sustained national or international acclaim at the top of her field, dismissing the appeal.

A site reliability engineer sought EB-1A classification. Four criteria were deemed waived, and the AAO withdrew the service center's favorable findings on judging and leading role, then rejected membership and original contributions. With fewer than three criteria met, the appeal was dismissed and final merits reserved.

A business executive planning a digital data analysis services company sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO found the applicant failed to establish three of ten initial criteria. Membership claims lacked evidence that the associations required outstanding achievements judged by recognized experts. The appeal was dismissed without reaching final merits.

An environmental science professor and researcher specializing in soil conservation and AI-powered monitoring systems sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification. The AAO dismissed the appeal, finding the petitioner met only two criteria (judging and scholarly articles) and failed to establish the required three; final merits determination also failed.

An EB-2 applicant seeking national interest waiver filed a third motion to reconsider after prior dismissals. The AAO dismissed the motion because petitioner merely disagreed with conclusions without identifying legal or policy errors as required for reconsideration. Underlying petition remained denied.

A philosophy researcher claimed seven extraordinary ability criteria; SCOPS found four met. AAO, in final merits determination, dismissed the appeal, concluding the totality of evidence does not demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim or that petitioner is among the very top of the field despite meeting initial criteria.

A computer scientist with master's degree sought an EB-2 national interest waiver for research in network architecture for data centers. The AAO dismissed, finding the petitioner established substantial merit but failed to prove national importance of the specific proposed endeavor despite industry relevance.

Energy policy analyst with master's degree sought EB-2 with national interest waiver to research energy policy reforms. The AAO dismissed the appeal because the petitioner failed to establish the proposed endeavor has national importance, lacking concrete evidence of economic impact, employment creation, or differentiated methodology from existing research.

Street dancer and cultural advocate sought EB-1A extraordinary ability classification for education and advocacy work. AAO dismissed appeal, finding petitioner failed to meet initial evidence requirement of three regulatory criteria. Awards were for competitive dancing not education; association membership inadequately documented; sustained national acclaim not established.

Biotechnology researcher proposes developing genomic editing tools for disease modeling and gene therapy targeting neurodegenerative and autoimmune disorders. AAO found the endeavor has substantial merit but rejected it because the record fails to establish the proposed endeavor's prospective impact or national importance, relying instead on general industry importance.

An accountant claimed extraordinary ability in business. Although service center found three criteria met, AAO affirmed denial because evidence of publications, editorial work, and awards clustered shortly before filing in 2025, failing to show sustained national or international acclaim required.

An English teacher and educational administrator from Turkey seeking EB-2 NIW classification failed to establish eligibility for the underlying advanced degree classification and did not demonstrate that her specific endeavor of integrating immigrants into the U.S. educational system had national importance, warranting dismissal.

Computer engineer with master's degree seeks NIW for research in advanced computational models, brain-machine interfaces, and smart sensors. AAO found proposed endeavor has substantial merit but lacks demonstrated national importance or evidence of impact on healthcare, neurotechnology, agriculture, or public health fields.

Physical therapist seeking EB-2 with NIW to operate healthcare clinic in the United States. AAO found petitioner met underlying advanced degree requirement but proposed endeavor lacks national importance. While addressing healthcare field shortage, evidence insufficient to show prospective impact beyond local clinic operations reaching national significance.

A self-petitioner proposes directing volleyball and soccer classes for low-income children. AAO affirmed service center revocation, finding proposed endeavor lacks national importance; offering youth sports to specific populations does not extend broader implications to industry, region, or nation required by Dhanasar.

A short-form content creator with large social media presence claimed extraordinary ability but satisfied only two evidentiary criteria (published material and critical role). On appeal, the AAO rejected the awards criterion due to insufficient documentation of selection criteria and merit-based recognition. With fewer than three criteria met, the AAO declined to reach final merits and dismissed.

A specialist mechanic sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. The AAO dismissed a motion to reopen and reconsider filed 74 days late. The motion was procedurally defective; the petitioner failed to demonstrate reasonable delay beyond its control when correcting a payment error.

A financial services professional with expertise in operational risk management sought EB-2 classification with national interest waiver. The AAO dismissed the appeal because his proposed endeavor to modernize fraud prevention and compliance infrastructure lacked demonstrated national importance. His plan would benefit limited stakeholders and offered insufficient evidence of substantial positive economic effects.

A synthetic organic chemist met at least three initial EB-1A criteria but failed the final merits step. AAO found his judging experience and publications insufficient to show he rose to the very top of the field or enjoyed sustained national or international acclaim.

A postdoctoral neuroscience researcher seeking national interest waiver for EB-2 advanced degree petition demonstrated the first Dhanasar prong: substantial merit and national importance of her proposed research. However, she failed the second prong because her academic accomplishments, citations, and letters of support were insufficient to show she is well positioned to advance the endeavor. Appeal dismissed.

A civil engineering company CEO sought EB-2 classification with a national interest waiver. Under the Dhanasar framework, the AAO found the proposed consulting endeavor lacked demonstrated national importance with broader implications, failing the first prong and requiring dismissal.

Information security associate vice president claimed seven criteria and satisfied three: judging, leading role, and high salary. AAO held initial evidence requirements met but final merits analysis showed insufficient evidence of sustained acclaim or placement among small percentage at top of field.

A dancer, choreographer, and coach met only two initial criteria and failed to demonstrate sustained national or international acclaim. AAO withdrew the service center's award finding and affirmed the final merits determination, dismissing the appeal.